Yay!! I'm tired of riding my bike to Popeys. My only complaint with Crown Fried Chicken is the bullet proof glass, which muffles sound and forces the customers to shout their order. I guess I'll deal with that.
Well, for starters, no other pzza joint or other business for that matter, has writing on the sloped part of an awning.
No other business has the neon window signs like the one pictured has, other than those, principally Merchantville Cleaners and the liquor store, which had them before the no-neon rule went into effect.
point taken. If I had a vault full of cash and was under the protection of keystone cops, I might "pack heat", however, I've got very little to steal so I mostly leave the doors unlocked and don't worry about it.
"point taken. If I had a vault full of cash and was under the protection of keystone cops, I might "pack heat", however, I've got very little to steal so I mostly leave the doors unlocked and don't worry about it."
I've got a wife and a young daughter. They're worth more to me than any vault full of cash. :)
CCW- I hear what you are saying and don't debate your right to carry a gun, however, I have to wonder what you are so afraid of. I also leave my door unlocked at night and I live on the West end, which isn't bad like the people on this blog think. If someone came into my house unanmounced in the middle of the night I would send my son downstairs to kick his ass. If my son wasn't home I would beat his head with a frying pan. End of story. Why do you cower in fear?
I've never heard of such lunacy of truly leaving doors unlocked. So I have a few questions for you:
1. If someone came into your house unannounced in the middle of the night, didn't make any noise, and stole your belongings, would you feel proud that you had the guts to leave your door unlocked?
2. Would your son still "kick his ass" if he was wielding a .45? What if he had an accomplice who was additionally wielding a .38? Your son must be superman. You would beat his head with a frying pan? Please tell me where you can get a frying pan that is impenetrable by a .44 magnum round and where you learned to have such fast reflexes that you can maneuver the pan fast enough to stop a bullet.
What makes you think I am "cowering in fear"? Believe me, I work out plenty - running, boxing, weight lifting. I'm not afraid that I wouldn't be able to "kick someone's ass", even your oh-so-tough son. Well, maybe I couldn't kick Brunton's ass - he's a pretty big dude, even bigger than I am - but the truth is that no matter how big, tough, strong, or cocky we are, a bullet will always win. Wouldn't you feel horrible if your son was shot and killed, or even stabbed, while trying to defend your house? Would that make you a proud mother or father knowing that your son was not a "coward" and that he got killed in his own house? To me, my family's safety has nothing to do with my own pride. My wife and daughter's lives are much more important than my pride and I want to be able to guarantee that they are safe.
Please answer this for me - is a man who's #1 priority is the safety of his wife and daughter at all costs really a coward for holding that priority above his own pride?
I truly hope that your son never has to defend your house with his fists, that you don't have to defend your house with a frying pan, and that my gun never has to be fired except at the range. I'm not trying to mock you or your family for your chosen methods of protection, but I'm really just trying to understand how putting your family at risk makes you less of a coward. If you lived alone, that would be fine since no one would be at risk but yourself. But I do question the manhood of one who would rather risk the injury or death of a family than guarantee his/her protection.
Doesn't advocating for the easy aquisition of guns, free of significant regulation by virually anyone in society, also put your family and other families at increased risk of significant harm?
No one is advocating for acquisition free of any regulation. I have no problem with the currently in place federal NICS system which instantly runs a check across multiple law enforcement agencies and immediately eliminates people with felonies, some misdemeanors, and documented (and deemed dangerous) mental illness from purchasing firearms. Any further regulation, though (like NJ's redundant, slow, and expensive system), only inhibits law abiding citizens from purchasing firearms, thus increasing crime rates.
Do you think it's merely a coincidence that Chicago, Washington DC, NYC, and all of NJ's cities have some of the highest violent crime and murder rates in the country in conjunction with the absolute most regulation over gun ownership? The truth is that criminals (who mostly buy their guns illegally - no matter how unregulated the system) thrive in locations where less law abiding citizens own guns because they know they face the least chance of armed resistance.
So the answer to your question is an loud and clear - NO way!
i dunno, i think my wife's cast iron pan would stop a bullet.
and no one is saying you shouldn't be able to protect your wife and daughter ccw, we're just questioning what you are so afraid of. the probability of someone breaking into your home is slim, particularly if you have the doors locked. and if you had a security system, its even more reduced.
and as for putting your wife and daughter in danger, the odds of you falling asleep on the couch with a loaded weapon on your hip and your daughter gabbing it and thinking its a toy and accidentally shooting herself are far greater than someone breaking into your home.
and again, violent crime rates in D.C. or Chicago cannot be linked to gun laws because they are not independent variables. try again. And the majority of guns in this country are bought legally. the problem is the idiots that buy them often give them to friends and family, or sell them privately and those people then use them for crimes. and until you can stop that from happening, the gun laws in this country are pathetic.
"i dunno, i think my wife's cast iron pan would stop a bullet."
And you're fast enough to swing it up into a defensive position to match the shooter's aim?
"and no one is saying you shouldn't be able to protect your wife and daughter ccw, we're just questioning what you are so afraid of. the probability of someone breaking into your home is slim, particularly if you have the doors locked. and if you had a security system, its even more reduced."
I'm not afraid of anything. I'm just realistic and God forbid anything ever does happen, I won't be saying, "I wish I didn't listen to the bloggers who told me that I was immune to home invasions because Merchantville is the safest place on Earth". I do have a security system and I do leave the doors locked. This is just another piece of the pie. Here's a question for you: Why do you pay for a security system each month when you could be even safer by spending the money on a gun and some ammo - a one time expense and you'd save money month after month once you broke even after about a year or less?
"and as for putting your wife and daughter in danger, the odds of you falling asleep on the couch with a loaded weapon on your hip and your daughter gabbing it and thinking its a toy and accidentally shooting herself are far greater than someone breaking into your home."
First off, I don't carry open on my hip. The gun is pocketed in a Desantis Nemesis holster (look it up) in condition 3 (no round in the chamber). My daughter 1. could not get it out of my pocket, 2. could not rack the slide, and 3. I don't nap with it - it stays in a safe or far out of reach when I'm sleeping. So, no, there is not a risk of my daughter shooting herself. And when she is older, if she has the maturity, she will be properly trained on gun safety.
"and again, violent crime rates in D.C. or Chicago cannot be linked to gun laws because they are not independent variables. try again. And the majority of guns in this country are bought legally. the problem is the idiots that buy them often give them to friends and family, or sell them privately and those people then use them for crimes. and until you can stop that from happening, the gun laws in this country are pathetic."
They may not be independent variables, but it has been shown time and time again that each time gun laws loosen, crime drops. Each time gun laws and restrictions tighten, crime increases. Please tell me what's pathetic about this country's gun laws. It's already illegal for felons to buy them. It's already illegal to use them in murder or crimes. It's already illegal to straw purchase, as you referenced. It's already illegal to shoot someone for any reason other than self defense. Have these laws eliminated any crimes? No. Keep making more illegal and the criminals will keep breaking them. It will not stop any crime. Just like carry laws - it's illegal to carry without a permit, but the criminals do it anyway. People had these "blood in the streets" and "wild wild west" theories when states started issuing carry permits and the predicted crime increases just did not happen.
the gun lawas are weak in this country because we don't take into account the fact that some people are just not mature enough to handle a gun properly. i know you are all about 2nd amendment rights, but i'm sorry, too many people are just straight irresponsible. We take more effort in making sure people know what they are doing when they get behind the wheel of a car then we hand them a firearm intended to kill people, in self defense or other. so, until you can figure that one out, our gun laws don't do the job. not everyone is like you ccw, hate to inform you. you also can't figure out how to prevent crazy people from buying weapons legally, unless they have a record of mental illness, which most do not. and because arms sellers are financially motivated by each sale, they'll sell to anyone so long as their background check doesnt raise flags.
also, until the govt removes that ridiculous loophole where you can buy firearms at gun shows without even a background check, the system is pointless.
and for the record, the sticker on my door that says i have a security system (it cost $1) even though i don't is cheaper than y our own a gun at home solution. and how are you keeping a loaded weapon in your pocket?
I don't envy CCW. He lives in a scary, scary world: Doors locked, security system, martial arts and guns at the ready. Everybody's out to get him, I guess.
We have no security alarm and sometimes lock our doors at night. (It's a good habit like washing your hands before lunch). I sure am glad that I'm not scared all the time. That must be hard.
Scary world? Maybe for you. I know that my world is safe and secure, so nope - mine isn't scary at all. :) And as far as I know, unless you know something different, no one is out to get me. They'd be making a stupid and dangerous mistake. I don't fear anyone or anything except things beyond my control (cancer, genetic diseases, etc). I'm sorry that you are afraid of my world of safety. It sux that you have to fear law abiding citizens like me.
Wait a minute, Chris - waaaaay more people are killed by immature car drivers than gun legal owners. How do the legal gun owners put us at more risk than legal (and immature) car drivers? No matter how many laws you pass, it will still be illegal to kill someone with a gun (outside of self defense) and the criminals will keep breaking that law. You could pass laws stating that only black people can buy guns. Guess what - white criminals will still buy them illegally. Vice-versa as well, of course. No matter what ridiculous laws you pass restricting this Constitutional freedom, criminals will still buy their illegal guns just as easily. If legal gun owners were such a threat, why don't the 40 states that have shall-issue carry systems in place have daily reports of legal permit holders shooting each other? It just does not happen. There are always going to be a few crazies out there - but with or without the law, they will still commit their crimes. The important thing is for the law abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves with the least restrictions reasonably possible. You just can't regulate "crazy" without a record of anything. Would you be ok with the gov't making it illegal to sell a car to someone who the seller feels is "not right"? What about kitchen knives? Do you wish to have background checks to make sure "crazies" can't get their hands on them? Better not order steak at Longhorn because if the waitress thinks you're crazy she won't give you a steak knife or else she may go to jail. Let's not get carried away with unenforceable and open ended regulation that opens the door to subjective government "rationing".
How am I keeping a loaded gun in my pocket? First off, I do not keep a loaded gun in my pocket. There is no round in the chamber. And I do not keep the gun in my pocket - I keep the gun in a pocket holster which is in my pocket. This is a completely legitimate and safe way to carry. This is the one I use: http://tiny.cc/4bhha
The security system sticker is a fairly decent deterrent. It's better than nothing. But you can't take it to the range and have fun with it, either, though. Have you ever been to the range? I've taken friends who were anti-gun and they had a great safe and fun time.
A gun with a clip full of bullets, with one in the chamber or not, is still a loaded gun. and you are the one who said you keep it in your pocket, i am just questioning the logistics behind that, i would think that would be annoying. i mean, i guess i could be worse, you could be like plaxico and keep it in your sweatpants elastic.
and you still didn't come up with a solution for all of the people who are just straight irresponsible. its a serious issue and you have not suggested a reasonable means to prevent idiots from buying guns legally. or maybe you are ok with it, because its your constitutional right. good example. I have a friend who is independently wealthy and he sits around all day long and gets drunk at his house. he doesn't ever drive anywhere and he isn't breaking any laws. but if you told me he had loaded guns at the house, i would be frightened for anyone who visited him. and frankly, you could be hammered and walk into a gun show and buy an assault rifle without a background check. you ok with that?
i'm not saying more people don't die at the hands of inexperienced drivers, but the intent of a car is not to kill someone, its to get someone from point a to point b. the intent of guns is to kill people. thats their only use (and don't say they also work well in threatening to kill someone, thats the same thing).
People in Merchantville, NJ can't LEGALLY purchase a gun without a permit and a background check. Additionally, purchasing ammunition in NJ requires a legal gun permit. Your info is checked and recorded.
Chris, how do you know your independently wealthy drunken friend doesn't have a loaded gun in his house? (Also...what does his financial worth have to do with anything?)
Legal guns aren't the problem.
There's a very good gun club in Delran that runs gun safety classes. You might want to check it out. delranjuniormarksman.com
the point about him being waelthy was to illustrate that he doesn't work and seriously sits at home drinking all day long. doesn't really matter, i suppose. And i suppose he could have a gun, but i am pretty sure he doesn't.
anyway, my point is that legal guns are a problem. I mean, if you are going to sit here and tell me that every gun used in a violent crime was bought illegaly, you are going to have to be kidding me. most guns used in crimes are obtained from family and friends, which in most cases bought the firearms legally. Now obviously, the person either selling or giving the gun to someone is technically breaking the law, but the gun was obtained legally, which brings me back to my original point. There is a huge number of people who buy guns perfectly legally that are COMPLETELY irresponsible and we have no way of addressing that issue currently, and any attempt to do so is fought rigorously by the NRA. And our punishment for individuals who sell or give weapons to people who use them in violent crimes is weak as well. Take Columbine for example. Some kid bought all of those guns and ammo for those two gunmen who killed 13 people. He got 2 years for all of that. dude should be in jail for life.
I'm not afraid of owning a gun, and I'm for it in the case where someone is responsible, which CCW appears to be. Its the other 50% (or whatever the number is) that i think are irresponsible.
Chris - first off, guns don't use clips - they use magazines. And they're loaded with cartridges, not bullets. Obviously you don't know much about guns, which is ok - until just a few years ago neither did I - but please don't try to sound like you know so much about them and about the competence of gun owners, then.
It actually is very comfortable in my pocket holster. Most "smartphones" are larger and bulkier than my KelTec P3AT. The holster smoothes it out so that it lays completely flat. If you came in my house, you would NEVER guess that I had it holstered. Hundreds of friends and family members continue to have no idea. It's the same as when you're in PA or any of the other 40 states with concealed carry. You simply don't even realize that 5-10% of the population in front of you and behind you in line at the store is also carrying. Until you hear about a shooting on the news, you don't realize that everyday, normal people carry guns all around you. Well, in NJ it's only the criminals and the cops. Plaxico is a moron. Anyone who carries unholstered (aka Mexican style) in the waistband is just asking for trouble.
Chris, what's your "solution for all of the people who are just straight irresponsible"? Most gun owners who I've met are more responsible than most non gun owners who I've met. The media would have you believe that most gun owners are redneck hicks or urban thugs when in reality most of us are professionals - doctors, engineers (not lawyers because they're mostly bleeding heart liberals who would rather take a bullet while on their knees begging for their life), financial advisors, managers, etc.
So do you feel that people need to pass an intelligence test to buy a gun if you are claiming that "idiots" should not be allowed? We allow ANYONE to vote and drive and there are many more people killed as a result of idiots voting and/or driving than by said idiots legally buying guns.
So what is wrong with your friend having loaded guns in his house? Since he gets drunk at home, do you feel that he shouldn't own a car or a butcher knife, either? If he isn't using them illegally or pointing them around at people, why are you so afraid? You really do live a life full of fear, just like Poplar.
It's illegal for a seller to sell you a gun while you're intoxicated at a gun show. You're a criminal if you do that. The law exists and the law is broken. Did that law stop the crime? Nope. It happened anyway. What makes you think MORE laws will suddenly have the criminals rolling over afraid of breaking them? Do you really think someone who is intent on murder is going to not illegally purchase a gun because it's against the law?
(cont) By the way - would you please define what you believe to be an assault rifle? This is one of the most humorous terms and it really does show the ignorance of the anti-gunner. By even using that term, you're admitting that you know nothing about guns.
The intent of a gun is to a) protect its owner and family, b) be used in shooting sports, and c) be used to hunt. No manufacturer designs a gun as says "I'm going to create the perfect tool to murder innocent people." That being said, why does the intent of the tool matter any more than the actual usefulness of it? Nevertheless, here're some useful stats to show you the intent behind guns and legal gun ownership:
"Every year, people in the United States use guns to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times. Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995
"The rate of defensive gun use (SGU) is six times that of criminal gun use." Crime statistics: Bureau of Justice Statistics - National Crime Victimization Survey (2005)
And, finally, with regards to your ignoring the intent of just showing a gun: "When using guns in self-defense, 91.1% of the time not a single shot is fired." National Crime Victimization Survey, 2000
Chris, http://www.dontlie.org/ states at least 10 years in jail for a straw purchase. I agree that it should be longer or harsher.
The NRA is absolutely all for enforcing and dishing out very strict punishments for anyone who illegally uses a gun, illegally purchases a gun, or illegally provides a gun to someone with the intent on using in a crime. I would know this - I'm an NRA life member and I read all of their publications. In fact, they were huge supporters in establishing a system that prevents felons from legally purchasing guns.
This article has been picked apart plenty of times already. What that article is showing is that in areas where violent crime is more prevalent, more people have chosen to arm themselves for protection. Please note the following statement from the article:
"It found that studies of the United States or U.S. cities, states and regions 'generally find a statistically significant gun prevalence-homicide association.'"
Many of the homicides are self defense shootings which are more common in areas where more people own guns for protection. They may have been murders (of the victim, instead of homicide of the attacker) if the defender was not carrying a gun.
OMG this is so boring! Let's talk about Merchantville. No more talk about a chicken that needs to carry his gun everywhere. This thread is about fried chicken- Crown Fried Chicken. Is it true that they also serve Seafood and Gyros? I've also heard that they have fantastic Southern style side dishes.
Looking through the article a bit more, I noticed the multiple quotes regarding "homicides" and very few mentions of "murder" except those by the author. Please realize that there is a very significant difference between homicide and murder.
From dictionary.com:
murder - the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
homicide - the killing of one human being by another
Homicide includes ANY killing of another human being, even if it was in justified self defense whereas murder is against the law.
Do they have gumbo? My wife loves that. I'm a huge fan of gyros (pronounced "yi'ros" as I've been corrected many times by my Greek friends). I'm looking forward to trying their food. Any idea when they're opening?
The founders left the question of gun ownership in a precarious position by giving us many ways to interpret the written word of the second amendment. I support our right to bear arms, but mayhaps some limits should be in place? But where do you draw the line? Do you let me, the apparent sane citizen, carry to protect my family against the tyranny of the state? Against criminals who might invade my house? Or just because I'm a little paranoid? I would say yes to all three, but why can a schizophrenic in Arizona so easily buy a gun and send a nation into fear? The no limits answer is wrong and the answer of no arms in civilian hands goes against our history and Constitution. But both sides are so entrenched in their idiocracy that compromise remains impossible and tragic errors caused by an abundance of firearms continue to plague us. Surely reasonable minds could find a solution. If only we would elect those reasonable minds.
To k.t.b.f.w., who wondered about the empty slots at the new PNC building.
There are 2 retail rental units at the corner of Maple and Chapel, which are part of the building PNC occupies.
At the end of January, TheraSport Therapy opened a physical therapy and rehab facility in one of those units. TheraSport Therapy also has a business location in Sewell and is co-owned and operated by physical therapists Jennifer Perno and Dan Liss. One rental unit still exists at the Maple/Chapel property.
The Crown Fried Chicken will be located at the circle, 177 S. Centre, in the building previously occupied by a pizza place. It has not yet opened.
"that building, with the PNC bank and all the empty spaces ... will it continue to be pretty and vacant for another few years?"
The Borough paid $7,000 for a professional study that reported that corner would not be suitable for retail. We could have allowed three nice homes on those three lots which would have raised more tax dollars than what is there now.
But, no, the Borough paid another $6,000 (?) for a second study (same company) that reversed the first findings, instead recommending retail.
If we didn't uproot the nation's fourth largest bank, paying out a million dollars to take its property, that Chapel corner would be totally vacant except for the wife of an up-and-coming councilman sticking her physical therapy business in one slot to save some embarrassment.
No, I am wrong. The builder would not build the vacant building until PNC signed a 20-year lease.
The whole deal was a big display of dominoes standing on their ends. We set it all up with our borrowed money and then knocked over the first piece to see the whole thing fall down. It reminds me of the 53-acre park that a north Jersey county built without an entrance.
Can someone explain to me why a Crown Fried Chicken is any worse than a pizza shop or Chinese takeout? There are a lot of CFCs in Philly and they don't look any worse than any other take out place???
I haven't been on the site for a while because there are a few of you that post things that just drive me up the wall. I wonder if that is on purpose?
I like to think that I am very rational person... If the signage and facade meets the criteria of the boro, then what is the problem? If the owners are trying to make money in Merchantville they are going to do what they can to make the business appealing to the people of Merchantville. If you don't like it, don't eat there. No one from Pennsauken or Camden is going to be traveling to Merchantville to eat at CFC. They have their own places to eat. So, if Merchantville folks don't eat there, then it will close. That simple. You may not have voted to put it there, but your dollars decide whether or not it will stay.
I lived in Merchantville for 15 years. Half of that time, I lived near Wellwood Park. This was 15 years ago. Even then everyone was concerned about "the people from Camden" infiltrating. In the 50 or so years since Camden "went down hill" it hasn't happened. If you are so concerned, then be happy that the taxes are high. It is a sort of hedge when the housing market is on a down swing. It keeps the monthly payments high, so you must have a higher income to afford a property. It also keeps rents high.
I graduated from Drexel with a Business degree, with concentrations in Economics, Finance & International Business. My husband and I ran a retail business in a redeveloping neighborhood in West Philly. I'm also a real estate agent. I'm not saying I know everything or that I know more than anyone else, but I do believe that I'm at least qualified enough to point out that some posts seem to be more passion than substance and I'd like to see a more level-headed approach to these very real and valuable discussions.
Alice (I believe), I have made an offer on a house already. I'm waiting to hear back. Fingers crossed. I'm hoping to be back in Merchantville soon.
As for those that have posted about how sub par the school is, I don't know what report card you read? It also seems that the people who are posting about how bad the schools are, also want to pay our teachers less and get some of the more experienced teachers to retire? I don't really understand that approach? Maybe we should all be looking at ways to support the school, rather than give up on it?
BTW, my husband and I plan on opening a business in Merchantville in the next year or so... I won't say what it is (can't let anyone steal my idea!), but it is family-friendly.
I studied the economics of grassroots urban redevelopment in my senior year of college. I was active in neighborhood groups and ran small business for 4 years. (We closed after my daughter was born and someone was murdered across the street at 4pm while my husband was outside with my infant daughter. We are hoping we won't have the same problem in Merchantville!) I have a lot of big ideas for Merchantville and I CANNOT wait to become an active citizen in a town that holds a very special place in my heart.g
Wow Kswan I'm so proud of you with all of your fancy college degrees and your real estate license. I can't wait for you to move here and tell us whats best. You're just as irritating as the crowd in this latest yuppy noise, pretty 30 something gals with petitions in their expensive hand bags, talking all sorts of bologna about fiscal responsibility.
Try not to be too upset by the Reality Check comment -- some people on this blog try to be sensational.
I, personally, thought your last couple of posts were encouraging. It will be good to have someone with your background and energy in town. Reality Check will probably be glad to have you in town, too.
Thanks Gail. Funny how people can assume things about you without knowing you at all!
Reality Check, I'm actually a VERY humble person. I'm in real estate because I genuinely like it and it allows me to work part-time while I raise our children. I drive 10 yr old car and plan on driving it until it croaks. I'm into urban homesteading. Heck, I can my own veggies! I own 1 "designer" bag and that was a gift 6 or 7 years ago. I send my daughter to progressive, cooperative preschool school. Now, I guess, you can peg me a hippie?
As for my opinions, I have the same right as eveyone else to state my ideas. I posted my background because no one on this blog knows me from a hole in the wall. I thought it would be helpful for readers to understand where I'm coming from. And yes, my education and experience should count for something. Most posts on this blog are written to persuade the reader. I was attempting to give validity to my arguments.
kswann: Funny how people can assume things about you without knowing you at all!
More sad than funny.
But there is one dimension that folks can get from blog comments without knowing the writers -- how big or small they are.
It happened that the little guy was first to attempt to belittle your accomplishments ... like a yapping miniatures who come charging halfway across the room when you enter that he wants to be his territory.
Ignore the barking if you can. If he nips, just kick him out of the way. No one will mind.
51 comments:
Yay!! I'm tired of riding my bike to Popeys. My only complaint with Crown Fried Chicken is the bullet proof glass, which muffles sound and forces the customers to shout their order. I guess I'll deal with that.
Just an Idea of where our town is headed.
Haddon Twonship has a Crown Fried, although I suspect our Crown fried will not last very long at this location despite all of the Facade Improvements.
Sun Bank had bullet proof glass, never had to shout my requests there.
Will they have a pay phone like the one in the picture? Who the #?!# still uses a pay phone?
The Crown Fried at 11th and Filbert in Philly does not have bullet proof glass. I doubt this one will have it.
It will be interesting to see what happens with their trademark neon signs. The one in Philly is cluttered with neon.
The sun bank in Merchantville had a bullet proof glass divider??? No wonder they're gone.
The glass was installed in Sun Bank after they were robbed -- twice.
How is that facade any different than local Pizza establishments in town?
Well, for starters, no other pzza joint or other business for that matter, has writing on the sloped part of an awning.
No other business has the neon window signs like the one pictured has, other than those, principally Merchantville Cleaners and the liquor store, which had them before the no-neon rule went into effect.
The bank across the street from the police station was robbed twice???
"The bank across the street from the police station was robbed twice???"
And you're still gonna tell me that I'm crazy for packing heat to protect my family at home?
point taken. If I had a vault full of cash and was under the protection of keystone cops, I might "pack heat", however, I've got very little to steal so I mostly leave the doors unlocked and don't worry about it.
"point taken. If I had a vault full of cash and was under the protection of keystone cops, I might "pack heat", however, I've got very little to steal so I mostly leave the doors unlocked and don't worry about it."
I've got a wife and a young daughter. They're worth more to me than any vault full of cash. :)
CCW- I hear what you are saying and don't debate your right to carry a gun, however, I have to wonder what you are so afraid of. I also leave my door unlocked at night and I live on the West end, which isn't bad like the people on this blog think. If someone came into my house unanmounced in the middle of the night I would send my son downstairs to kick his ass. If my son wasn't home I would beat his head with a frying pan. End of story. Why do you cower in fear?
I've never heard of such lunacy of truly leaving doors unlocked. So I have a few questions for you:
1. If someone came into your house unannounced in the middle of the night, didn't make any noise, and stole your belongings, would you feel proud that you had the guts to leave your door unlocked?
2. Would your son still "kick his ass" if he was wielding a .45? What if he had an accomplice who was additionally wielding a .38? Your son must be superman. You would beat his head with a frying pan? Please tell me where you can get a frying pan that is impenetrable by a .44 magnum round and where you learned to have such fast reflexes that you can maneuver the pan fast enough to stop a bullet.
What makes you think I am "cowering in fear"? Believe me, I work out plenty - running, boxing, weight lifting. I'm not afraid that I wouldn't be able to "kick someone's ass", even your oh-so-tough son. Well, maybe I couldn't kick Brunton's ass - he's a pretty big dude, even bigger than I am - but the truth is that no matter how big, tough, strong, or cocky we are, a bullet will always win. Wouldn't you feel horrible if your son was shot and killed, or even stabbed, while trying to defend your house? Would that make you a proud mother or father knowing that your son was not a "coward" and that he got killed in his own house? To me, my family's safety has nothing to do with my own pride. My wife and daughter's lives are much more important than my pride and I want to be able to guarantee that they are safe.
Please answer this for me - is a man who's #1 priority is the safety of his wife and daughter at all costs really a coward for holding that priority above his own pride?
I truly hope that your son never has to defend your house with his fists, that you don't have to defend your house with a frying pan, and that my gun never has to be fired except at the range. I'm not trying to mock you or your family for your chosen methods of protection, but I'm really just trying to understand how putting your family at risk makes you less of a coward. If you lived alone, that would be fine since no one would be at risk but yourself. But I do question the manhood of one who would rather risk the injury or death of a family than guarantee his/her protection.
Doesn't advocating for the easy aquisition of guns, free of significant regulation by virually anyone in society, also put your family and other families at increased risk of significant harm?
No one is advocating for acquisition free of any regulation. I have no problem with the currently in place federal NICS system which instantly runs a check across multiple law enforcement agencies and immediately eliminates people with felonies, some misdemeanors, and documented (and deemed dangerous) mental illness from purchasing firearms. Any further regulation, though (like NJ's redundant, slow, and expensive system), only inhibits law abiding citizens from purchasing firearms, thus increasing crime rates.
Do you think it's merely a coincidence that Chicago, Washington DC, NYC, and all of NJ's cities have some of the highest violent crime and murder rates in the country in conjunction with the absolute most regulation over gun ownership? The truth is that criminals (who mostly buy their guns illegally - no matter how unregulated the system) thrive in locations where less law abiding citizens own guns because they know they face the least chance of armed resistance.
So the answer to your question is an loud and clear - NO way!
i dunno, i think my wife's cast iron pan would stop a bullet.
and no one is saying you shouldn't be able to protect your wife and daughter ccw, we're just questioning what you are so afraid of. the probability of someone breaking into your home is slim, particularly if you have the doors locked. and if you had a security system, its even more reduced.
and as for putting your wife and daughter in danger, the odds of you falling asleep on the couch with a loaded weapon on your hip and your daughter gabbing it and thinking its a toy and accidentally shooting herself are far greater than someone breaking into your home.
and again, violent crime rates in D.C. or Chicago cannot be linked to gun laws because they are not independent variables. try again. And the majority of guns in this country are bought legally. the problem is the idiots that buy them often give them to friends and family, or sell them privately and those people then use them for crimes. and until you can stop that from happening, the gun laws in this country are pathetic.
"i dunno, i think my wife's cast iron pan would stop a bullet."
And you're fast enough to swing it up into a defensive position to match the shooter's aim?
"and no one is saying you shouldn't be able to protect your wife and daughter ccw, we're just questioning what you are so afraid of. the probability of someone breaking into your home is slim, particularly if you have the doors locked. and if you had a security system, its even more reduced."
I'm not afraid of anything. I'm just realistic and God forbid anything ever does happen, I won't be saying, "I wish I didn't listen to the bloggers who told me that I was immune to home invasions because Merchantville is the safest place on Earth". I do have a security system and I do leave the doors locked. This is just another piece of the pie. Here's a question for you: Why do you pay for a security system each month when you could be even safer by spending the money on a gun and some ammo - a one time expense and you'd save money month after month once you broke even after about a year or less?
"and as for putting your wife and daughter in danger, the odds of you falling asleep on the couch with a loaded weapon on your hip and your daughter gabbing it and thinking its a toy and accidentally shooting herself are far greater than someone breaking into your home."
First off, I don't carry open on my hip. The gun is pocketed in a Desantis Nemesis holster (look it up) in condition 3 (no round in the chamber). My daughter 1. could not get it out of my pocket, 2. could not rack the slide, and 3. I don't nap with it - it stays in a safe or far out of reach when I'm sleeping. So, no, there is not a risk of my daughter shooting herself. And when she is older, if she has the maturity, she will be properly trained on gun safety.
"and again, violent crime rates in D.C. or Chicago cannot be linked to gun laws because they are not independent variables. try again. And the majority of guns in this country are bought legally. the problem is the idiots that buy them often give them to friends and family, or sell them privately and those people then use them for crimes. and until you can stop that from happening, the gun laws in this country are pathetic."
They may not be independent variables, but it has been shown time and time again that each time gun laws loosen, crime drops. Each time gun laws and restrictions tighten, crime increases. Please tell me what's pathetic about this country's gun laws. It's already illegal for felons to buy them. It's already illegal to use them in murder or crimes. It's already illegal to straw purchase, as you referenced. It's already illegal to shoot someone for any reason other than self defense. Have these laws eliminated any crimes? No. Keep making more illegal and the criminals will keep breaking them. It will not stop any crime. Just like carry laws - it's illegal to carry without a permit, but the criminals do it anyway. People had these "blood in the streets" and "wild wild west" theories when states started issuing carry permits and the predicted crime increases just did not happen.
"Mergermania" has taken a back seat to gun rights. This blog is getting really boring.
the gun lawas are weak in this country because we don't take into account the fact that some people are just not mature enough to handle a gun properly. i know you are all about 2nd amendment rights, but i'm sorry, too many people are just straight irresponsible. We take more effort in making sure people know what they are doing when they get behind the wheel of a car then we hand them a firearm intended to kill people, in self defense or other. so, until you can figure that one out, our gun laws don't do the job. not everyone is like you ccw, hate to inform you. you also can't figure out how to prevent crazy people from buying weapons legally, unless they have a record of mental illness, which most do not. and because arms sellers are financially motivated by each sale, they'll sell to anyone so long as their background check doesnt raise flags.
also, until the govt removes that ridiculous loophole where you can buy firearms at gun shows without even a background check, the system is pointless.
and for the record, the sticker on my door that says i have a security system (it cost $1) even though i don't is cheaper than y our own a gun at home solution. and how are you keeping a loaded weapon in your pocket?
I don't envy CCW. He lives in a scary, scary world: Doors locked, security system, martial arts and guns at the ready. Everybody's out to get him, I guess.
We have no security alarm and sometimes lock our doors at night. (It's a good habit like washing your hands before lunch). I sure am glad that I'm not scared all the time. That must be hard.
Scary world? Maybe for you. I know that my world is safe and secure, so nope - mine isn't scary at all. :) And as far as I know, unless you know something different, no one is out to get me. They'd be making a stupid and dangerous mistake. I don't fear anyone or anything except things beyond my control (cancer, genetic diseases, etc). I'm sorry that you are afraid of my world of safety. It sux that you have to fear law abiding citizens like me.
Wait a minute, Chris - waaaaay more people are killed by immature car drivers than gun legal owners. How do the legal gun owners put us at more risk than legal (and immature) car drivers? No matter how many laws you pass, it will still be illegal to kill someone with a gun (outside of self defense) and the criminals will keep breaking that law. You could pass laws stating that only black people can buy guns. Guess what - white criminals will still buy them illegally. Vice-versa as well, of course. No matter what ridiculous laws you pass restricting this Constitutional freedom, criminals will still buy their illegal guns just as easily. If legal gun owners were such a threat, why don't the 40 states that have shall-issue carry systems in place have daily reports of legal permit holders shooting each other? It just does not happen. There are always going to be a few crazies out there - but with or without the law, they will still commit their crimes. The important thing is for the law abiding citizens to be able to protect themselves with the least restrictions reasonably possible. You just can't regulate "crazy" without a record of anything. Would you be ok with the gov't making it illegal to sell a car to someone who the seller feels is "not right"? What about kitchen knives? Do you wish to have background checks to make sure "crazies" can't get their hands on them? Better not order steak at Longhorn because if the waitress thinks you're crazy she won't give you a steak knife or else she may go to jail. Let's not get carried away with unenforceable and open ended regulation that opens the door to subjective government "rationing".
How am I keeping a loaded gun in my pocket? First off, I do not keep a loaded gun in my pocket. There is no round in the chamber. And I do not keep the gun in my pocket - I keep the gun in a pocket holster which is in my pocket. This is a completely legitimate and safe way to carry. This is the one I use: http://tiny.cc/4bhha
The security system sticker is a fairly decent deterrent. It's better than nothing. But you can't take it to the range and have fun with it, either, though. Have you ever been to the range? I've taken friends who were anti-gun and they had a great safe and fun time.
A gun with a clip full of bullets, with one in the chamber or not, is still a loaded gun. and you are the one who said you keep it in your pocket, i am just questioning the logistics behind that, i would think that would be annoying. i mean, i guess i could be worse, you could be like plaxico and keep it in your sweatpants elastic.
and you still didn't come up with a solution for all of the people who are just straight irresponsible. its a serious issue and you have not suggested a reasonable means to prevent idiots from buying guns legally. or maybe you are ok with it, because its your constitutional right. good example. I have a friend who is independently wealthy and he sits around all day long and gets drunk at his house. he doesn't ever drive anywhere and he isn't breaking any laws. but if you told me he had loaded guns at the house, i would be frightened for anyone who visited him. and frankly, you could be hammered and walk into a gun show and buy an assault rifle without a background check. you ok with that?
i'm not saying more people don't die at the hands of inexperienced drivers, but the intent of a car is not to kill someone, its to get someone from point a to point b. the intent of guns is to kill people. thats their only use (and don't say they also work well in threatening to kill someone, thats the same thing).
People in Merchantville, NJ can't LEGALLY purchase a gun without a permit and a background check. Additionally, purchasing ammunition in NJ requires a legal gun permit. Your info is checked and recorded.
Chris, how do you know your independently wealthy drunken friend doesn't have a loaded gun in his house? (Also...what does his financial worth have to do with anything?)
Legal guns aren't the problem.
There's a very good gun club in Delran that runs gun safety classes. You might want to check it out. delranjuniormarksman.com
the point about him being waelthy was to illustrate that he doesn't work and seriously sits at home drinking all day long. doesn't really matter, i suppose. And i suppose he could have a gun, but i am pretty sure he doesn't.
anyway, my point is that legal guns are a problem. I mean, if you are going to sit here and tell me that every gun used in a violent crime was bought illegaly, you are going to have to be kidding me. most guns used in crimes are obtained from family and friends, which in most cases bought the firearms legally. Now obviously, the person either selling or giving the gun to someone is technically breaking the law, but the gun was obtained legally, which brings me back to my original point. There is a huge number of people who buy guns perfectly legally that are COMPLETELY irresponsible and we have no way of addressing that issue currently, and any attempt to do so is fought rigorously by the NRA. And our punishment for individuals who sell or give weapons to people who use them in violent crimes is weak as well. Take Columbine for example. Some kid bought all of those guns and ammo for those two gunmen who killed 13 people. He got 2 years for all of that. dude should be in jail for life.
I'm not afraid of owning a gun, and I'm for it in the case where someone is responsible, which CCW appears to be. Its the other 50% (or whatever the number is) that i think are irresponsible.
Chris - first off, guns don't use clips - they use magazines. And they're loaded with cartridges, not bullets. Obviously you don't know much about guns, which is ok - until just a few years ago neither did I - but please don't try to sound like you know so much about them and about the competence of gun owners, then.
It actually is very comfortable in my pocket holster. Most "smartphones" are larger and bulkier than my KelTec P3AT. The holster smoothes it out so that it lays completely flat. If you came in my house, you would NEVER guess that I had it holstered. Hundreds of friends and family members continue to have no idea. It's the same as when you're in PA or any of the other 40 states with concealed carry. You simply don't even realize that 5-10% of the population in front of you and behind you in line at the store is also carrying. Until you hear about a shooting on the news, you don't realize that everyday, normal people carry guns all around you. Well, in NJ it's only the criminals and the cops. Plaxico is a moron. Anyone who carries unholstered (aka Mexican style) in the waistband is just asking for trouble.
Chris, what's your "solution for all of the people who are just straight irresponsible"? Most gun owners who I've met are more responsible than most non gun owners who I've met. The media would have you believe that most gun owners are redneck hicks or urban thugs when in reality most of us are professionals - doctors, engineers (not lawyers because they're mostly bleeding heart liberals who would rather take a bullet while on their knees begging for their life), financial advisors, managers, etc.
So do you feel that people need to pass an intelligence test to buy a gun if you are claiming that "idiots" should not be allowed? We allow ANYONE to vote and drive and there are many more people killed as a result of idiots voting and/or driving than by said idiots legally buying guns.
So what is wrong with your friend having loaded guns in his house? Since he gets drunk at home, do you feel that he shouldn't own a car or a butcher knife, either? If he isn't using them illegally or pointing them around at people, why are you so afraid? You really do live a life full of fear, just like Poplar.
It's illegal for a seller to sell you a gun while you're intoxicated at a gun show. You're a criminal if you do that. The law exists and the law is broken. Did that law stop the crime? Nope. It happened anyway. What makes you think MORE laws will suddenly have the criminals rolling over afraid of breaking them? Do you really think someone who is intent on murder is going to not illegally purchase a gun because it's against the law?
(cont)
(cont)
By the way - would you please define what you believe to be an assault rifle? This is one of the most humorous terms and it really does show the ignorance of the anti-gunner. By even using that term, you're admitting that you know nothing about guns.
The intent of a gun is to a) protect its owner and family, b) be used in shooting sports, and c) be used to hunt. No manufacturer designs a gun as says "I'm going to create the perfect tool to murder innocent people." That being said, why does the intent of the tool matter any more than the actual usefulness of it? Nevertheless, here're some useful stats to show you the intent behind guns and legal gun ownership:
"Every year, people in the United States use guns to defend themselves against
criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times. Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995
"The rate of defensive gun use
(SGU) is six times that of criminal gun use." Crime statistics: Bureau of Justice Statistics - National Crime Victimization Survey (2005)
And, finally, with regards to your ignoring the intent of just showing a gun:
"When using guns in self-defense, 91.1% of the time not a single shot is fired." National Crime Victimization Survey, 2000
Chris,
http://www.dontlie.org/ states at least 10 years in jail for a straw purchase. I agree that it should be longer or harsher.
The NRA is absolutely all for enforcing and dishing out very strict punishments for anyone who illegally uses a gun, illegally purchases a gun, or illegally provides a gun to someone with the intent on using in a crime. I would know this - I'm an NRA life member and I read all of their publications. In fact, they were huge supporters in establishing a system that prevents felons from legally purchasing guns.
Interesting article about the relationship between gun and murder rates.
More guns = more murder, in the statistics anyway.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/are_violent_crimes_more_or_less_common.html
This article has been picked apart plenty of times already. What that article is showing is that in areas where violent crime is more prevalent, more people have chosen to arm themselves for protection.
Please note the following statement from the article:
"It found that studies of the United States or U.S. cities, states and regions 'generally find a statistically significant gun prevalence-homicide association.'"
Many of the homicides are self defense shootings which are more common in areas where more people own guns for protection. They may have been murders (of the victim, instead of homicide of the attacker) if the defender was not carrying a gun.
OMG this is so boring! Let's talk about Merchantville. No more talk about a chicken that needs to carry his gun everywhere. This thread is about fried chicken- Crown Fried Chicken. Is it true that they also serve Seafood and Gyros? I've also heard that they have fantastic Southern style side dishes.
Looking through the article a bit more, I noticed the multiple quotes regarding "homicides" and very few mentions of "murder" except those by the author. Please realize that there is a very significant difference between homicide and murder.
From dictionary.com:
murder - the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
homicide - the killing of one human being by another
Homicide includes ANY killing of another human being, even if it was in justified self defense whereas murder is against the law.
Do they have gumbo? My wife loves that. I'm a huge fan of gyros (pronounced "yi'ros" as I've been corrected many times by my Greek friends). I'm looking forward to trying their food. Any idea when they're opening?
If I stop at the chicken place I won't get shot will I?
Please explain the rationale behind your question. Man, you guys live in a world of fear!
I wonder if they can make gyros (it's yee-roh, not jie-roh) as good as the ones from the Santorini Cafe (easily the best gyro I've ever had)...
Not sure why anyone should care if we're getting a Crown... better than a vacant storefront in town, eh?
Anyone heard of potential tenants for the empty slots in the new PNC building?
[Anyone heard of potential tenants for the empty slots in the new PNC building?]
Somebody explain, please.
PNC is a renter in the new building. What slots? Will Crown Chicken be taking half the retail space?
The founders left the question of gun ownership in a precarious position by giving us many ways to interpret the written word of the second amendment. I support our right to bear arms, but mayhaps some limits should be in place? But where do you draw the line? Do you let me, the apparent sane citizen, carry to protect my family against the tyranny of the state? Against criminals who might invade my house? Or just because I'm a little paranoid? I would say yes to all three, but why can a schizophrenic in Arizona so easily buy a gun and send a nation into fear? The no limits answer is wrong and the answer of no arms in civilian hands goes against our history and Constitution. But both sides are so entrenched in their idiocracy that compromise remains impossible and tragic errors caused by an abundance of firearms continue to plague us. Surely reasonable minds could find a solution. If only we would elect those reasonable minds.
To k.t.b.f.w., who wondered about the empty slots at the new PNC building.
There are 2 retail rental units at the corner of Maple and Chapel, which are part of the building PNC occupies.
At the end of January, TheraSport Therapy opened a physical therapy and rehab facility in one of those units. TheraSport Therapy also has a business location in Sewell and is co-owned and operated by physical therapists Jennifer Perno and Dan Liss. One rental unit still exists at the Maple/Chapel property.
The Crown Fried Chicken will be located at the circle, 177 S. Centre, in the building previously occupied by a pizza place. It has not yet opened.
Was the CFC signage approved? Does anyone know when it's opening? Is it true that it's owned by the same guy that ran Nando's?
> Somebody explain, please.
You know exactly what I'm talking about, but I'll humor you...
I don't know the name of the that building, with the PNC bank and all the empty spaces. (Assuming it has a name.)
So, whatever it happens to be called, is anyone going to move in there, ever? Or will it continue to be pretty and vacant for another few years?
"that building, with the PNC bank and all the empty spaces ... will it continue to be pretty and vacant for another few years?"
The Borough paid $7,000 for a professional study that reported that corner would not be suitable for retail. We could have allowed three nice homes on those three lots which would have raised more tax dollars than what is there now.
But, no, the Borough paid another $6,000 (?) for a second study (same company) that reversed the first findings, instead recommending retail.
If we didn't uproot the nation's fourth largest bank, paying out a million dollars to take its property, that Chapel corner would be totally vacant except for the wife of an up-and-coming councilman sticking her physical therapy business in one slot to save some embarrassment.
No, I am wrong. The builder would not build the vacant building until PNC signed a 20-year lease.
The whole deal was a big display of dominoes standing on their ends. We set it all up with our borrowed money and then knocked over the first piece to see the whole thing fall down. It reminds me of the 53-acre park that a north Jersey county built without an entrance.
Can someone explain to me why a Crown Fried Chicken is any worse than a pizza shop or Chinese takeout? There are a lot of CFCs in Philly and they don't look any worse than any other take out place???
I haven't been on the site for a while because there are a few of you that post things that just drive me up the wall. I wonder if that is on purpose?
I like to think that I am very rational person... If the signage and facade meets the criteria of the boro, then what is the problem? If the owners are trying to make money in Merchantville they are going to do what they can to make the business appealing to the people of Merchantville. If you don't like it, don't eat there. No one from Pennsauken or Camden is going to be traveling to Merchantville to eat at CFC. They have their own places to eat. So, if Merchantville folks don't eat there, then it will close. That simple. You may not have voted to put it there, but your dollars decide whether or not it will stay.
I lived in Merchantville for 15 years. Half of that time, I lived near Wellwood Park. This was 15 years ago. Even then everyone was concerned about "the people from Camden" infiltrating. In the 50 or so years since Camden "went down hill" it hasn't happened. If you are so concerned, then be happy that the taxes are high. It is a sort of hedge when the housing market is on a down swing. It keeps the monthly payments high, so you must have a higher income to afford a property. It also keeps rents high.
I graduated from Drexel with a Business degree, with concentrations in Economics, Finance & International Business. My husband and I ran a retail business in a redeveloping neighborhood in West Philly. I'm also a real estate agent. I'm not saying I know everything or that I know more than anyone else, but I do believe that I'm at least qualified enough to point out that some posts seem to be more passion than substance and I'd like to see a more level-headed approach to these very real and valuable discussions.
Alice (I believe), I have made an offer on a house already. I'm waiting to hear back. Fingers crossed. I'm hoping to be back in Merchantville soon.
As for those that have posted about how sub par the school is, I don't know what report card you read? It also seems that the people who are posting about how bad the schools are, also want to pay our teachers less and get some of the more experienced teachers to retire? I don't really understand that approach? Maybe we should all be looking at ways to support the school, rather than give up on it?
BTW, my husband and I plan on opening a business in Merchantville in the next year or so... I won't say what it is (can't let anyone steal my idea!), but it is family-friendly.
I studied the economics of grassroots urban redevelopment in my senior year of college. I was active in neighborhood groups and ran small business for 4 years. (We closed after my daughter was born and someone was murdered across the street at 4pm while my husband was outside with my infant daughter. We are hoping we won't have the same problem in Merchantville!) I have a lot of big ideas for Merchantville and I CANNOT wait to become an active citizen in a town that holds a very special place in my heart.g
Wow Kswan I'm so proud of you with all of your fancy college degrees and your real estate license. I can't wait for you to move here and tell us whats best. You're just as irritating as the crowd in this latest yuppy noise, pretty 30 something gals with petitions in their expensive hand bags, talking all sorts of bologna about fiscal responsibility.
Try not to be too upset by the Reality Check comment -- some people on this blog try to be sensational.
I, personally, thought your last couple of posts were encouraging. It will be good to have someone with your background and energy in town. Reality Check will probably be glad to have you in town, too.
Thanks Gail. Funny how people can assume things about you without knowing you at all!
Reality Check, I'm actually a VERY humble person. I'm in real estate because I genuinely like it and it allows me to work part-time while I raise our children. I drive 10 yr old car and plan on driving it until it croaks. I'm into urban homesteading. Heck, I can my own veggies! I own 1 "designer" bag and that was a gift 6 or 7 years ago. I send my daughter to progressive, cooperative preschool school. Now, I guess, you can peg me a hippie?
As for my opinions, I have the same right as eveyone else to state my ideas. I posted my background because no one on this blog knows me from a hole in the wall. I thought it would be helpful for readers to understand where I'm coming from. And yes, my education and experience should count for something. Most posts on this blog are written to persuade the reader. I was attempting to give validity to my arguments.
kswann: Funny how people can assume things about you without knowing you at all!
More sad than funny.
But there is one dimension that folks can get from blog comments without knowing the writers -- how big or small they are.
It happened that the little guy was first to attempt to belittle your accomplishments ... like a yapping miniatures who come charging halfway across the room when you enter that he wants to be his territory.
Ignore the barking if you can. If he nips, just kick him out of the way. No one will mind.
Post a Comment