| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Decisions: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Spartan198 (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I took the liberty to remove your comment ''''in other words, standard LAPD protocol'''' from the text below the 4th Beretta 92FS image. It originally read 'In an act of police brutality (in other words, standard LAPD protocol) Det. Lou Andreas etc.etc.'. I feel IMFDB is not the place to pass judgment on the law enforcement community, [[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] ([[User talk:PeeWee055|talk]]) 10:01, 4 July 2013 (EDT) | I took the liberty to remove your comment ''''in other words, standard LAPD protocol'''' from the text below the 4th Beretta 92FS image. It originally read 'In an act of police brutality (in other words, standard LAPD protocol) Det. Lou Andreas etc.etc.'. I feel IMFDB is not the place to pass judgment on the law enforcement community, [[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] ([[User talk:PeeWee055|talk]]) 10:01, 4 July 2013 (EDT) | ||
No, that comment certainly shouldn't have been there. You were right to remove it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 21:49, 4 July 2013 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 01:49, 5 July 2013
That's definitely not a Pythong. You can see the S&W-style release in the last cap. Maybe a Taurus? Or a Rossi? --Funkychinaman (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
- The shape of the front sight better matches Rossi though I cannot find any Rossi model that has four holes in went rib. Greg-Z (talk) 02:11, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
Text Beretta 92FS
I took the liberty to remove your comment 'in other words, standard LAPD protocol' from the text below the 4th Beretta 92FS image. It originally read 'In an act of police brutality (in other words, standard LAPD protocol) Det. Lou Andreas etc.etc.'. I feel IMFDB is not the place to pass judgment on the law enforcement community, PeeWee055 (talk) 10:01, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
No, that comment certainly shouldn't have been there. You were right to remove it. Spartan198 (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2013 (EDT)