So, I know this guy right, we all know one of those, you know the one, the one that will hook-you-up! Okay, anyway, this guy does tattoos and piercings in his home, or wherever. I have always advised against getting ink done at anyone’s house. It may be cheaper in price but it’s not cheaper if it gets infected, one catches hepatitis or it’s a phucked up piece that can’t get fixed, because there’s no customer service.
Anyway, the same guy does piercings too. Apparently, he was all set up to let people know that he was open for business and this is what he put out there……..
Really?? Where dey do THIS at? If this piercing table looks like a baby’s high chair, it’s because it is. As a matter of fact, if it looks like a dirty ass high chair…….it is that too. How would anyone know by looking at this picture that ANY of this stuff is clean? Not just clean, sterile? People can do what they want to do, but this would NOT be me.
I am a firm believer in, “you get what you pay for” and in cases like this, you could get a bonus but free sh!t ain’t always good either.
I have believed, for quite some time that the best person to run this country would be a businessman and not a politician. For me, it seems logical, especially if you can garner a CEO or CFO that got a major corporation from out of the red and into the black. It only seems logical as that is what needs to happen economically in this country. Herman Cain is a business man and not one to be underestimated, however, to have a lot of business sense and fall short in the common sense department isn’t a good thing for anyone.
I listen to Herman Cain and I think that he and Joe Biden should have their own HBO comedy special, followed by a stand up comedy tour. What those two think are “good ideas” qualify as comedy at the highest levels. Between Biden saying that Obama’s health care bill is a “Big Fvckin’ deal” with an open mic and Cain talking about people making mistakes with their “hos”…….. I have to say that some people don’t take politics..or life, too seriously.
In case you don’t know about Cain’s “ho” reference. He made a promo ad with this organization called “America’s Pact” and they ran an advertisement in black neighborhoods that wen’t something like this……okay, not something like this, exactly like this.
Oh FFS!! I can understand making a bad choice, ONCE….but to run this ad in 2004 and 2006, means that he actually thought this was a good idea…. ha ha…doooooooood!! Oh and by the way….”Toot-suite” means “right away” … if you don’t know..now you know. I would suggest that Cain NOT use this promo for his campaign….. or anyone else’s, ever, for that fact. Cain needs to have a seat, toot suite.
Well it seems like I recovered from my melt down the other day. Yesterday, I spoke at one of the Community College campus’s to a juvenile justice class. I lectured on the new issues and trends in juvenile justice.
One thing that I got a lot of time to talk about is how the age of technology is making legislators rethink current policies as they relate to the online distribution of child pornography by minors.
The core issue is that prior to the age of camera phone, iPhones, pads, Blackberry’s and so on, the only way to distribute pictures was to have them developed and mailed. Young people were not engaging in that kind of activity, as it took time and money, but now, with the convenience of picture phones and smart phones, anything is a go…..
The gist of my lecture is that many states are just now beginning to introduce legislation to deal with child pornography created by minors, distributed by minors and received by minors. Prior to some of the recent legislation, minors were held under the same child pornography statues as adults. The creation, distribution and receipt of child pornography would, in fact still be a felony for minors and and they would have to place their name on the sex offender registry, just as an adult.
Many states are seeing the felony and the registry component as being too severe for minors, as both of those entities would follow a minor into his or her adult life. so many states have passed laws decreasing the penalties for minors to a misdemeanor and no registry addition. Although, this is a lesser charge, a misdemeanor is still punishable by up to one year in jail and a wide range of fines.
We discussed the issues as to how state, local and federal governments were going to assign jurisdiction over such cases and the whole nine yards.
The reference point for the conversation was an analysis of the topic as brought to light but the video of a 14-year old girl who was recorded performing oral sex on her boyfriend, that recently went viral as well as the concept of “sexting”.
At the beginning, many people were prepared to disengage. Some had their heads on their desks, other people where chillin with their iPods and so on… it wasn’t intimidating as much as I thought it rude. I was able to use humor to redirect that behavior and get everyone focused. Once that happened, the lecture went very well. The class asked great questions and the more we got into the topic, the more they opened up and discussed how they think the law should handle these situations.
Overall it was a great class and my mentor may have an opportunity for me to help write an Introduction To Criminal Justice textbook…that would be AWESOME!!
I thought that this article was super interesting because it substantiates an argument that I have had with opponents of the death penalty. At one time, it used to cost the state more to execute an inmate than it took to house them for life. However, since offenders are receiving longer sentences, the criminal justice system now has to start making preparations to deal with progressive diseases such as Alzheimer’s, advanced issues pertaining to diabetes, cardiac issues, HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, just to name a few. Some states are even having to create institutions that are very similar to nursing homes. In the prison industry, and elderly inmate is one over the age of 55. Enough of my banter, here is the article:
Yohannes Johnson, 55, serving 75 years to life in an upstate New York prison, heads the Lifer’s and Long-Termer’s Organization, part of a growing club of inmates locked up for life nationwide, reports the Associated Press. Corrections officials are considering different options for older inmates while some research suggests keeping them locked up until they die might be an expensive and unnecessary price for the public to pay. Nationally, nearly 10 percent of more than 2.3 million inmates were serving life sentences in 2008, including 41,095 people doing life without parole, up 22 percent in five years, says The Sentencing Project, which advocates alternatives to prison.
“The theme is we’re protecting society, then the question is: From what?” said Soffiyah Elijah of the Correctional Association of New York, a watchdog group. She said with the cost of keeping a state inmate $55,000 a year – a cost that grows as they age and their medical needs increase – a financial analysis shows that parole and probation are far cheaper punishments that can also satisfy the public need for retribution. Data show new crimes by convicted felons steadily declining from their teens through their dotage. “What kind of treatment programs should we be considering for the offenders who have a sentence of life without parole, or enter the system with sentences of 50 years to life?” New York Corrections Commissioner Brian Fischer asked on the 40th anniversary of the deadly riots at Attica, a maximum-security prison in New York State.
One of the people I follow on Twitter sent out a study that claims that there is a correlation between heavy soda drinking and teen violence. I am going to post the findings of the study because I think that it is an interesting read but that’s about it.
The study, conducted in Boston by French researchers, claims that “teen violence IS linked to heavy soda drinking”. The researchers make their claims based on the testing of Boston inner city students ages 14-18. The researchers admit that a bulk of the study was comprised of Black, Latino and bi-racial (black and white) children and contained little to no Asian or White students.
Some of you research and design guru’s out there can correct me, but it seems to me that if Asian and White students are not incorporated into the study, that it would be a bogus to assume that teen violence, as a whole, is linked to heavy soda drinking. Based on how the study was conducted, I would even be hesitant to claim that teen violence in minority youths is linked to heavy soda drinking as there was no control group to support that claim either.
Furthermore, the study was conducted via survey, which, for numerous reasons can be dicy in terms of the results. I think that the study is more of a foundation for more studies to be conducted on the topic.
The study authors concede that sodas are probably not the direct cause of the aggression, which isn’t saying much as this study was not in depth enough to render causation.
Here is the study:
PARIS — Researchers in the United States said on Tuesday they had found a ‘shocking’ association — if only a statistical one — between violence by teenagers and the amount of soda they drank.
High-school students in inner-city Boston who consumed more than five cans of non-diet, fizzy soft drinks every week were between nine and 15-percent likelier to engage in an aggressive act compared with counterparts who drank less.
‘What we found was that there was a strong relationship between how many soft drinks that these inner-city kids consumed and how violent they were, not only in violence against peers but also violence in dating relationships, against siblings,’ said David Hemenway, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health.
‘It was shocking to us when we saw how clear the relationship was,’ he told AFP in an interview.
But he stressed that only further work would confirm — or disprove — the key question whether higher consumption of sweet sodas caused violent behaviour.
The new study was based on answers to questionnaires filled out by 1,878 public-school students aged 14 to 18 in the inner Boston area, where Hemenway said crime rates were much higher than in the wealthier suburbs.
The overwhelming majority of respondents were Hispanic, African-American or mixed; few were Asian or white.
Among the questions were how much carbonated non-diet soft drink, measured in 12-ounce (355-millilitre) cans, the teens had drunk in the previous seven days.
They were also asked whether they drank alcohol or smoked, carried a weapon or showed violence towards peers, family members and partner.
What emerged, said Hemenway, was evidence of ‘dose response,’ in other words, the more soda was consumed, the likelier the tendency towards violence.
Among those who drank one or no cans of soft drink a week, 23 percent carried a gun or a knife; 15 percent perpetrated violence towards a partner; and 35 percent had been violent towards peers.
At the other end of the scale, among those who drank 14 cans a week, 43 percent carried a gun or a knife; 27 percent had been violent towards a partner; and more than 58 percent had been violent towards peers.
Overall, teens who were heavy consumers of sugary fizz were between nine and 15 percentage points likelier to show aggressive behaviour compared with low consumers, even when ethnicity and other confounding factors were taken into account.
This is a magnitude similar to the link found, in previously researched, with alcohol or tobacco.
Hemenway said the study had included a couple of questions aimed at taking a children’s home background into account, including whether the teen had taken a meal with his family in the previous days.
As it was only intended as a preliminary investigation, the questionnaire did not ask what kind of sodas the teens drank, he said.
‘This is one of the very first studies to examine’ the question, said Hemenway.
‘We don’t know why (there is this strong association). There may be some causal effect but it’s also certainly plausible that this is just a marker for other problems — that kids who are violent for whatever reason, they tend to smoke more, they tend to drink more alcohol and they tend to maybe drink more soft drinks. We just don’t know.
‘We want to look at it more carefully in following studies.’
The study, published in a British journal, Injury Prevention, will revive memories of the ‘Twinkie Defence,’ a US legal landmark in which a killer successfully argued that his behaviour had been swayed by eating junk food.
The defendant in this case, Dan White, had been charged with homicide. His lawyer’s successful pleading led to conviction of a lesser charge, of voluntary manslaughter.
Several studies elsewhere have established a link between very high sugar consumption and lack of social bonding or irritable and anti-social behaviour.
Some diet research has also pointed the finger at the lack of micro-nutrients as a source of aggression, but this work is still in its early stages.
In my last posting on the 40th anniversary of the “War on Drugs, ” I wrote that we now know a great deal more about the science of addiction. In a follow-up post, I would like to outline a more effective strategy for dealing with the use and abuse of illegal and legal drugs.
I propose that we pursue a strategy that is based on empirical evidence about the science of addiction, the impact of drugs on the human brain, and the effectiveness of treatment. Since the past 40 years of enforcement-based efforts have proven largely ineffective, it’s time for a new approach.
The argument for a new strategy is more compelling than just change for change’s sake, however. The evidence has grown to a point where it is clear that the drivers of the drug problem are as much medical as anything; thus our strategy should be based on a public health model, not a criminal justice model.
I think it is important to acknowledge up front that changing our strategy in this way will be a tough sell because of a number of characteristics of contemporary American society:
there is a widespread lack of knowledge among the public, elected officials and policy makers about the science of addiction.
the tenacity of Americans’ belief that addiction is the result of poor choices and moral weakness.
our country’s pervasive reliance on a punishment-based response to drug abuse and addiction through the criminal and juvenile justice systems.
the lack of knowledge of, and engagement by, the broader medical community in the identification, diagnosis and treatment of drug and alcohol abuse and addiction.
a disturbing, anti-science mindset among a significant portion of the population, including prominent elected officials and candidates for higher office.
I find this situation puzzling in a country where medical science occupies such a revered status.
Many pioneering breakthroughs have eradicated diseases, alleviated suffering and improved the quality of life for millions of people worldwide. Ours is a country where medical treatment, especially with prescription drugs, is almost considered a birthright. Witness the passionate and often angry defenses mounted when the federal healthcare reform legislation was being considered, and even after it went into effect.
The medical science/health care/pharmaceutical industry is a huge part of our domestic economy, employing thousands and providing routine and emergency care to millions of Americans every day. Our standard of care is generally first rate, with the exception of drug and alcohol addiction.
In this area, we behave for the most part like it is still the 19th century.
In this country, we have a love affair with drugs of all types. I think it is fair to say that we are “addicted to prescriptions.” Just watch commercial television in prime time and you will be subjected to an endless parade of advertisements for prescription drugs to treat a variety of ailments and symptoms.
The phrase “talk to your doctor about…” is always heard, identifying a specific drug. Since when did it become the norm for the patient to diagnose an ailment (often based solely on the commercial) and suggest a drug to a physician? I think of the well-known phenomenon of students reading descriptions of diseases and convincing themselves that they have all of the symptoms.
Hopefully, physicians are diligent about diagnosing and prescribing, but the incredible rise in the number and type of prescriptions gives one pause. In a scathing critique of drug companies and doctors, Marcia Angell explores the dynamics of prescription practices and drug effects in mental health. It is hard not to conclude that drugs are being over-prescribed for behavioral disorders, particularly with children and adolescents.
While prescription drugs provide many benefits, they are not entirely benign. Legal prescription drugs are the fastest growing category of drugs of abuse. These are not heroin, cocaine or methamphetamines purchased on crime-ridden street corners in urban ghettoes. They are legal drugs, often obtained through legal means, which are then shared, sold or stolen. This phenomenon has the potential for widening the drug enforcement net to include many people who would not fir the typical profile of a drug abuser or addict. Perhaps this will be one of the drivers that could result in a change of strategy.
My first exposure to the emerging science of addiction was provided in the late 1990s by Alan Leshner, then director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), who gave a presentation which featured color slides of PET scans of the human brain under the influence of drugs.
It was the updated, and scientifically accurate, version of the old television commercial “This is your Brain on Drugs” showing an egg sizzling in a frying pan. Leshner’s slides graphically illustrated how human brain functioning was affected by drugs. This and other research led to the conclusion that addiction is a “chronic relapsing disease of the brain”, and does not result from a personal weakness or moral failure by the addicted person.
NIDA has continued and expanded this important research under the current director, Nora Volkow who is a specialist in scanning and mapping the brain structures and processes. She wants to shift the emphasis away from addiction as a criminal problem and make it a medical problem.
Dr. Volkow has said “My obsession is to engage the healthcare system in addiction” The title of the article on Volkow identified her as a “general in the drug war.” A reader subsequently wrote to the editor, correcting that perception by noting that Volkow and NIDA are not fighting a war but rather “are devoted to uncovering knowledge on addiction as an illness and to finding evidence-based methods to help people recover.”
This is a quest that underpins the rationale for a change of strategy.
In addition to the development of a robust body of research on the science of addiction and its treatment, there are some other hopeful signs that change may be feasible. The popularity and effectiveness of drug courts has largely restored the legitimacy of treatment as a response to drug abuse and addiction. Drug courts have grown over the past two decades to become an accepted component of an evidence-based approach to drugs and crime.
A number of states (New York and New Jersey among them) have revised their drug laws to reduce their severity and make it easier for the offender to get treatment. The enormous cost of building and operating prisons to incarcerate thousands of non-violent drug users is also causing states to reconsider community-based treatment alternatives.
Texas, a legendary law and order state, is prominent among the states that have redirected funding away from prisons and into treatment and community supervision of drug offenders.Based on the ineffectiveness of the law enforcement/punishment strategy and the promise of an evidence-based public health approach, I propose the following as a framework for a more rational, humane and effective drug policy.
1. Shift the primary emphasis from law enforcement and punishment to demand reduction. The present approach is massively expensive and largely ineffective in significantly reducing demand. As we can see with recent history in Mexico, drug distribution and enforcement activities are incredibly violent and destructive of civil society.
2. Invest in research and development on addiction, and on the technology transfer work to implement research finding in practice. The pending merger of NIDA and its alcohol counterpart, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism should produce synergies to advance research. One example of a promising avenue is addiction vaccines. It would seem prudent to redirect some of the funds now allocated to enforcement to an expanded research program.
3. In Increase the engagement of the medical community in primary prevention and interventions. Too many people begin their addictions with behaviors that should be red flags for medical professions with the proper training. Medical practitioners at all levels should be the first line of defense.
4. Develop and deploy a broad-based educational public effort on the science of addiction and its treatment. This campaign should target citizens, parents, educators, elected officials, policy-makers as well as the health care community. Public health campaigns have proven effective for initiatives as diverse as stopping smoking and increasing seat belt use.
5. Build on successful efforts to address abuse and addiction through interventions and treatment. As noted above, drug courts have made great strides to demonstrate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of treatment for substance abusers. Unfortunately, such courts are not universally available and only reach a fraction of the drug abusers in the justice system. More juvenile drug courts are especially needed. Larger statutory and policy-based efforts to redirect resources and offenders to treatment in the community should be encouraged and reinforced.
6. Highlight the cost-benefit aspects of the public health model over the criminal justice model. Numerous high-quality studies have shown the significant financial benefits that accrue from a treatment-based approach to addiction. People remain in the community, maintain their ties to family and work, pay taxes and build social capital. A more aggressive public health approach can reduce the costs of untreated substance abuse even when the abusers are not involved in the justice system. The costs of untreated drug and alcohol abuse to businesses and employers include lost productivity, accidents and health insurance costs.
It is rather simple to articulate the framework for such a change in policy. There will no doubt be need for elaboration and refinement. Gaining broad acceptance and succeeding at implementation will be much greater challenges.
But I believe the potential is there for transforming our society and reducing the harm we now inflict on our fellow citizens, our communities and other sovereign nations.
William D. Burrell is a regular blogger for The Crime Report. An independent corrections management consultant specializing in community corrections and evidence-based practices, he was a member (2003-2007) of the faculty in the Department of Criminal Justice at Temple University in Philadelphia. Prior to joining the Temple faculty, Bill served for 19 years as chief of adult probation services for the New Jersey state court system. Bill is chairman of the Editorial Committee for Perspectives, the journal of the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) and serves on APPA’s Board of Directors. He has consulted, and developed and delivered training for probation and parole agencies at the federal, state and county levels. He welcomes reader comments.
For weeks, police came up empty in their search for a gang member charged with distributing the drug ecstasy — until they turned to Facebook.
It took a few keystrokes for Prince George’s County officers to find their man’s user profile, where they had expected to see his usual rantings about police and coded tidbits about his chosen trade. But what they discovered was even more helpful: That very morning, the fugitive had posted a photograph of himself wearing what one officer described as a “very distinctive” purple and teal shirt.
A few hours later, a photo of the suspect in hand, officers spotted the alleged dealer on the street. “We picked him out right away,” said Sgt. John O’Donnell of the Prince George’s gang unit. “You couldn’t have missed him. He knew we were looking for him. But he couldn’t help himself from updating Facebook.”
The arrest of the alleged dealer highlights the increasing use of Facebook and other social networking sites by street and drug gangs to broadcast messages, boast of successes and recruit new members, according to local and federal authorities. The sites offer a never-ending panoply of gang members’ comments about drug dealing, weapons and violence, as well as photographs of gang tattoos and of members flashing gang signs and standing under gang-related graffiti — an intelligence boon for law enforcement.
Police and federal agents say they often turn first to Facebook and Myspace, two popular social media outlets, to gather information about gangs, their members and their “friends.”
In Prince George’s, for example, undercover police have “friended” many gang members to help keep tabs on them and to better understand associations within the groups. Social media pages are not always available for public viewing, but users who do not properly set their security settings can leave their pages open for all to see, including the police.
Officers in the District comb sites to produce a weekly “Social Media” report for detectives on the latest information and trends related to D.C. street gangs, an ever-evolving universe of idiosyncratic neighborhood crews with assorted alliances and beefs.
“It’s like a spider web of connections,” said D.C. Police Lt. Michael Pavlik, head of the department’s intelligence unit. “You find one and track that down, and find a friend and then follow that. It’s a wealth of information, and it helps you keep up with them in a way we never imagined just a few years ago.”
Federal authorities have also tapped into Facebook and Myspace for help in major gang investigations.
In one case, members of an alleged drug gang in Southeast Washington openly discussed the narcotics trade on a member’s Facebook profile page, according to court papers filed by the FBI in March.
“SNITCHES WANT ME LOCKED UP,” one alleged dealer wrote, the papers say. About 20 minutes later, he added that he had been frisked by police. “The streets don’t love me,” he wrote, according to agents. “Jumpers came out like I had a bomb strapped to me yesterday.”
Sometimes we have those strange days that we feel claustrophobic in our own lives. Today is one of those days. I am going to contribute part of this feeling to a big ole, fat ass case of PMS, but it’s not the best feeling in the world.
School started today, and even though the workload is heavy, I look forward to the start of the new sessions. I do occasionally have these days where I feel locked in to a pressure cooker that has be surrounded by school, business issues, client things, family and personal stuff. At the end of the day, I feel like I got a lot done but maybe not as supported as I’d like to feel.
No, this is not some “oh poor pitiful me” thing, rather it’s taking the time to acknowledge that I am not the only hard working person in the world that has moments of feeling closed in by the things that make up our life. It’s not uncommon for women to be the main support beam for different areas of their life but sometimes being very aware that it feels like the beams that are supposed to support them, aren’t quite strong enough.
Wow, all of that can lead to some unhealthy shit, if one lets it. So what is one to do? First, it helps me to rethink how much responsibility I am trying to shoulder that is not mine. I have to sometimes remove myself from all situations for a few hours and take a look at things. It has to be realized that one person cannot fix everything, especially when other grown folks are involved. Remembering that people were able to manage their lives before we showed up and will continue to do so even when we’re no longer involved is a great thing, because by remembering that, means that one can duck out and let other people handle their own stuff.
After all that, if I still feel locked in, I look at what I can accomplish in one day and make a list of priorities. Sometimes I have trouble sticking to that, but it helps me feel like I’ve been productive anyway.
As my last act of reducing the pressure in my cooker, I grab my blanket, pillow and animals and tune in something random on Netflix. That which can keep, will do so until the next day…..
So, today, I got a chance to go out and get some new ink. Every shop has their own atmosphere and apparently, mine wants to keep theirs just like it is, so they have this pamphlet called “Tattoo Etiquette”. Well, I have been going their for ions, but I wanted to take a gander at it anyway, this is brilliant…here is All Star Tattoo’s guide to tattoo shop etiquette.
DO NOT go into a tattoo studio i you’ve been drinking or are under the influence of drugs. Show your tattoo artist some respect and come sober. Nobody likes dealing with drunks.
DO NOT try to bargain with your tattoo artist- Bargaining in a tattoo shop is an exercise in bad taste and the quickest way to tick your artist off. You want quality work, not a bargain.
DO NOT brag to tattoo artist about how cheap you got your other tattoos- You will not earn brownie points and it SURE won’t get you a better deal on your tattoo.
DO NOT tell your artist about your buddy that does tattoos in their house/basement/ garage. Tattooing in a non-shop setting is frowned on in the tattoo community and will not make you seem cooler.
DO look at the artist’s portfolios. Tattoos are permanent, so make sure your artist can put on a clean looking tattoo Pictures don’t lie and if they don’t have a portfolio, run.
DO NOT ask your artist to draw something just to see if he can. There are people who come into the studio and ask for designs to be drawn without ever getting tattooed, don’t be that guy.
DO NOT bring a cheering section into the studio – Most shops will not let anyone accompany you into the tattoo area and it’s prohibited by law in some states. You are always free to ask, but very few artist want 5 of your friends crowding the work area while he/she is trying to mark you for life.
DO NOT bring children into the tattoo studio. Tattoo studios are not a place for children as there are many hazards that they can be exposed to. Children can also be a distraction to you, your artist and other clients.
The next two are my two personal favorites:
DO maintain personal hygiene and physical decorum. There’s noting more unpleasant than having to work on someone who smells. You wouldn’t go to the doctor without bathing, do do the same for your tattoo artist. (You really have to tell grown folks to wash their ASS?? )
DO NOT try to force your artist to make social conversation if they don’t seem receptive to it. Some artists like to talk and others don’t. Your artist will appreciate the consideration and it’ll be reflected in the work. (lol @ this, we are not customer service or therapist clause…ha ha.. I love it).
DO tell your artist if you are feeling green or funny. Tell your artist right away (don’t try to tough it out), so that he/she can deal with it. Your artist is prepared for it and knows how to handle it.
DO tip your tattoo artist. If you didn’t know that tipping your artist is customary, YOU DO NOW!! Tattoo artists DO NOT get paid an hourly wage, they earn a percentage of the money you pay for you tattoo and that is it. If you receive exceptional service, show your appreciation by tipping. As a general rule, tipping 10% is a minimum, 15-20% is normal and anything more is considered tipping heavily.
It is a damned shame that a shop has to tell grown ass folks how to act, smell and pay. That is one thing that I like about the shop I go to, they speak their mind… lol.
Oh, duh.. what did I get today? This…. don’t hate, you know it’s cute… lol
I know that last night I was all the rave about DMX’s performance on the BET Hip Hop Awards and I do still think that he’s all that and then some but Heavy D laid it down. I was a little worried about Tyrese when he first came out, I had some concerns that he had contracted a bad case of tone deafness. He’s fine and all that but he got off to a rough start. When all the water boils out of the pot, Heavy killed it. Watching him do the Dougie was great fun, so, I think that Heavy and DMX stole the show, but then again, I’m an ole head lol.