Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So why do the cops need a tank? [View all]A HERETIC I AM
(24,908 posts)85. You should change your username.
Perhaps "Bulldog" would be more appropriate.
Why? Because you have sunk your teeth into something and you'll be damned if you are going to let it go.
It ain't a fucking tank, man.
No matter how you try and spin the definition, it ain't a god damned tank.
Your larger point is valid, but your nomenclature is wrong. But that just doesn't matter to you, does it?
You might as well call the Cessna built, single engine police spotter planes that are so common in this country 747's. Yeah, they're both airplanes, but one has nothing to do with the other.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
110 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think it's not worth getting hung up on such things, tank was a slang term
HereSince1628
Sep 2013
#32
and I think you're using it as a strawman to avoid addressing the central point of the post.
HereSince1628
Sep 2013
#43
I don't buy for a second that that thing has more armor than modern AFVs. (nt)
Posteritatis
Sep 2013
#40
Coaxial machine gun? Not even. You don't know what you are talking about.
GreenStormCloud
Sep 2013
#109
LOL, their is always some literal genius on the DU who misses the whole point of a post! n-t
Logical
Sep 2013
#61
You may recall that at Waco they had to wait until the Army supplied then with Tanks
1-Old-Man
Sep 2013
#15
All the evidence suggests that the government believes that it is at war with the populace
Taitertots
Sep 2013
#19
As many others said, it's not a tank... But here in the US, it might as well be
penultimate
Sep 2013
#23
It seems similar to why people get corrected when they use the term battleship instead of warship...
penultimate
Sep 2013
#37
Right or wrong -- to keep up with the increasingly armed populace, and militia loons.
Hoyt
Sep 2013
#68
Technically, it is NOT a tank. It is an armored vehicle. Not that I'm saying they need one.
Pterodactyl
Sep 2013
#76
Last time I looked, that ain't no tank. That's to cart around some pigliCON governor somewhere.
lonestarnot
Sep 2013
#99