2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: Q on February 18, 2014, 01:45:37 PM
-
http://youtu.be/H9cqps37q1c (http://youtu.be/H9cqps37q1c)
-
Alooooooooohaaaa!
-
Another shining example of Obama Nation! I thought rednecks were bad. Power to the people! :shaka:
-
That little fella sure has a big mouth. Probably needs a good ass beating for starters. Would have be so funny if the white guy or better yet, the girl kicked his ass.
-
Reading through all the Hawaii News Now comments for this video, it's scary. The majority (locals) are excusing his terroristic threats by saying it's the fault of the whites and Americans who invaded and occupied Hawaii.
If that's the stuff people here learn from and teach their family and friends, then this state has real problems. The hatred of Haoles here seems to run deep in some locals, and this isn't an isolated incident.
Commenters on the HNN thread want to "analyze" this punk and try to understand his anger.
That's all well and good, but AFTER he's arrested and punished for his bad behavior. Hopefully there is little argument that his out-of-control verbal attack and threats of violence were just wrong. PERIOD!
-
^That being said, I notice a lot of the Youtube comments are from angry locals that would scrap dis faka
You can argue the "white man takeover" thing all day, but anyone who says they abuse dogs and hit women needs to get lickens
-
Not saying this is the case in this situation but often racial hatred is passed down through generations and often instilled by the parents. Blaming these young white people for the past is ridiculous, and in an asinine way to boot.
-
That little fella sure has a big mouth. Probably needs a good ass beating for starters. Would have be so funny if the white guy or better yet, the girl kicked his ass.
i am not understanding where ccw comes into play here
yeah, ok, he's mouthy and advancing with his hands in his pockets, but at what point would you do anything with a concealed handgun?
please learn me
-
Damn he was mad huh? Lol
One thing I'd like to point out is there is never 2 sides to a story. We should all take the uploaders description of events leading up to this as 110% fact. We should also post about how we would have loved to have ccw so we could kill the guy that will definitely help our cause when catlover forwards this to his politician friends.
-
i am not understanding where ccw comes into play here
yeah, ok, he's mouthy and advancing with his hands in his pockets, but at what point would you do anything with a concealed handgun?
please learn me
I'm with you...I wouldn't do anything with a concealed handgun in this situation.
Digressing a little but think about the Chris Deedy situation and how that got out of hand. This could have been Deedy 2 if this white guy was a Deedy type LEO who felt threatened or I suspect the CCW critics would argue these types of situations could escalate to a shooting. Not agreeing with that logic just saying...
-
Wouldn't any investigation of a claim of using a weapon (any weapon) in self defense turn on the determination by law enforcement and/or the justice system whether the defender had a "reasonable belief" of imminent death or serious bodily injury?
E.g. Zimmerman, yes; Dunn, no.
-
The thing that always gets me about locals like this guy is they always seem to be the ones who are at the beach drunk throwing bottles and trash everywhere, destroying property.. etc etc etc. There is not a single beach I can go to or even get near without seeing just piles of trash and broken bottles everywhere. Except the ones at the hotels. Why? Because of ignorant f*** mokes like this guy.
If I were the ones at the picnic bench I would not be drawing out my firearm from what I have seen here but I would be glad to know I have it in the event this guy did escalate to physical violence.
HPD response to CCW is call the police... Call the police? Right. This is who shows up. Probably related to the guy in the original video.
Making a complaint on a berserk police officer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GHoh7XnSDk#ws)
From urban dictionary: moke
A person (usually with an ethnic background consisting of Hawaiian, Filipino, and/or Japanese. And in some very rare cases Caucasian) who is a local of one of the Hawaiian islands. Is extremely profound and in most cases, fluent in the use of "pidgin" laguage. These people usually have an IQ of 50 but make up for it with thier ability to talk a lot of trash. They engage in a lot of trash talk, and usually have nothing to back it up. They enjoy getting into fights at school and hoping that it will gain them many popularity points. Their "fights" are mostly pushing around and yelling the phrase "wat 'chu faka" out loud many times and are broken up extemely quickly. Many mokes may look tough but are actually very sensitive. If you joke about them, they threaten you, if you look at them they get pissed very quickly, and if your a white person, they will call you a "haole" and tell you to get out of Hawaii. Mokes believe that the white man took over and degraded Hawaii when really, the white man helped modernize Hawaii.
They also have low-income familys. Which probably explains why they can't speak proper English. Which makes it very hard to understand them
-
The thing that always gets me about locals like this guy is they always seem to be the ones who are at the beach drunk throwing bottles and trash everywhere, destroying property.. etc etc etc. There is not a single beach I can go to or even get near without seeing just piles of trash and broken bottles everywhere. Except the ones at the hotels. Why? Because of ignorant f*** mokes like this guy.
If I were the ones at the picnic bench I would not be drawing out my firearm from what I have seen here but I would be glad to know I have it in the event this guy did escalate to physical violence.
HPD response to CCW is call the police... Call the police? Right. This is who shows up. Probably related to the guy in the original video.
Making a complaint on a berserk police officer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GHoh7XnSDk#ws)
From urban dictionary: moke
A person (usually with an ethnic background consisting of Hawaiian, Filipino, and/or Japanese. And in some very rare cases Caucasian) who is a local of one of the Hawaiian islands. Is extremely profound and in most cases, fluent in the use of "pidgin" laguage. These people usually have an IQ of 50 but make up for it with thier ability to talk a lot of trash. They engage in a lot of trash talk, and usually have nothing to back it up. They enjoy getting into fights at school and hoping that it will gain them many popularity points. Their "fights" are mostly pushing around and yelling the phrase "wat 'chu faka" out loud many times and are broken up extemely quickly. Many mokes may look tough but are actually very sensitive. If you joke about them, they threaten you, if you look at them they get pissed very quickly, and if your a white person, they will call you a "haole" and tell you to get out of Hawaii. Mokes believe that the white man took over and degraded Hawaii when really, the white man helped modernize Hawaii.
They also have low-income familys. Which probably explains why they can't speak proper English. Which makes it very hard to understand them
I don't know what beaches you been to braddah but you might wanna try a few more. There is tons of beautiful shoreline around all the islands. Thanks for that completely unracist definition btw, I'm sure members of this forum are unfamiliar with the term 'moke' lol. Maybe next time you see a race baiting thread you should take a few mins and deep breaths before posting :thumbsup:
-
What the so called "moke" did seemed wrong. Yet the camera only showed one end of the story . Who knows what could of started this dispute . CCW has nothing to do with this unless he pulled a blade or a firearm. Don't be quick to blame :shaka: be safe people
-
The thing that always gets me about locals like this guy is they always seem to be the ones who are at the beach drunk throwing bottles and trash everywhere, destroying property.. etc etc etc. There is not a single beach I can go to or even get near without seeing just piles of trash and broken bottles everywhere. Except the ones at the hotels. Why? Because of ignorant f*** mokes like this guy.
If I were the ones at the picnic bench I would not be drawing out my firearm from what I have seen here but I would be glad to know I have it in the event this guy did escalate to physical violence.
HPD response to CCW is call the police... Call the police? Right. This is who shows up. Probably related to the guy in the original video.
Making a complaint on a berserk police officer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GHoh7XnSDk#ws)
From urban dictionary: moke
A person (usually with an ethnic background consisting of Hawaiian, Filipino, and/or Japanese. And in some very rare cases Caucasian) who is a local of one of the Hawaiian islands. Is extremely profound and in most cases, fluent in the use of "pidgin" laguage. These people usually have an IQ of 50 but make up for it with thier ability to talk a lot of trash. They engage in a lot of trash talk, and usually have nothing to back it up. They enjoy getting into fights at school and hoping that it will gain them many popularity points. Their "fights" are mostly pushing around and yelling the phrase "wat 'chu faka" out loud many times and are broken up extemely quickly. Many mokes may look tough but are actually very sensitive. If you joke about them, they threaten you, if you look at them they get pissed very quickly, and if your a white person, they will call you a "haole" and tell you to get out of Hawaii. Mokes believe that the white man took over and degraded Hawaii when really, the white man helped modernize Hawaii.
They also have low-income familys. Which probably explains why they can't speak proper English. Which makes it very hard to understand them
I'm Hawaiian /japanese so am I a Moke ?
-
At the end of the video, the local guy said "I dare you to try and be a hero again"
If I had to guess, I'd say that this local guy was probably arguing with his old lady and the haole approached him "trying to be a hero".
This is all just a guess though.
Realistically, the guy was just mad but didn't do anything violent.
If you can't take a few angry words, you don't need a concealed weapon, you just need some vagisil.
-
Kinda sounded like maybe the local guy was doing something to his dog or a dog and the guy or girl may have said something to make him stop that upset him but I don't really know...just guessing too. Only speculating because the girl mentioned something at the end about they are just dog loving people.
-
At the end of the video, the local guy said "I dare you to try and be a hero again"
If I had to guess, I'd say that this local guy was probably arguing with his old lady and the haole approached him "trying to be a hero".
This is all just a guess though.
Realistically, the guy was just mad but didn't do anything violent.
If you can't take a few angry words, you don't need a concealed weapon, you just need some vagisil.
youtube explanation says that they intervened when they saw a guy throw an object at a dog
this "moke" jumped in for the alleged thrower
-
If you can't take a few angry words, you don't need a concealed weapon, you just need some vagisil.
+1
-
youtube explanation says that they intervened when they saw a guy throw an object at a dog
this "moke" jumped in for the alleged thrower
Too bad the dog didn't attack and bite the shit out of him. But then again someone would have said the dog should be put down for being violent.
-
I would have invited him down for some food and beer and said chill the fuck out boss. how can any one say not to spam, rice, poke, and all the great foods here in hawaii. after a full stomach we drink brew and likker and enjoy the day.
-
I don't know about CCW, but if he'd come at me like that, especially if my wife and daughter were present, the last thing he would've remembered saying would've been
"wat fukka". I'd have driven his little dick into the dirt.
But then, I've done it before. It's the only thing they seem to understand. :-*
-
Gosh. You cant win for losing. police are mad. Locals are mad. Locals conduct......bad. POLICE conduct...........really bad. Un-professional at best. CCW plays no part in either. Sorry for the bad behavior. By the local guy and the local law enforcement. As a local, I apologize. As a Deputy Sheriff law enforcement.... I apologize. Really un-professional. Dang. We as 2@ people need to conduct ourselves better than this. Avoid confrontation. The best confrontation is the one avoided. I cant believe the cop though. Trained and 20 plus years service....shameful. Hang tuff boys. We know better. Focus on the legislature. Thats where our battle is.
-
I'm Hawaiian /japanese so am I a Moke ?
Moke, haole, portagee, Japanese. whatever you may be. That jackass does not need to be defended. That behavior is just plain wrong. Imagine it was a white guy there screaming "fuck Hawaiians." How you think that would go over. I don't care what color you are, that was just plain punk assedness. :thumbsup: and, I don't see this as being relevant to CCW whatsoever.
-
Moke, haole, portagee, Japanese. whatever you may be. That jackass does not need to be defended. That behavior is just plain wrong. Imagine it was a white guy there screaming "fuck Hawaiians." How you think that would go over. I don't care what color you are, that was just plain punk assedness. :thumbsup: and, I don't see this as being relevant to CCW whatsoever.
was I asking YOU ? NO . It was a simple question. Who gives a flying fuck what race they are talking about ? You know what fuck Hawaiian's what have they done for Hawaiians ? Nothing put you on a fucking list for homes , schools ? Me defend him ? No all I said was don't be quick to judge . What if the dude said something stupid to him ?
-
Too bad the dog didn't attack and bite the shit out of him. But then again someone would have said the dog should be put down for being violent.
the dog should of attacked him at least he would of went down swinging .
-
I'm Hawaiian /japanese so am I a Moke ?
Conveniently you must not have read the rest of the description. Personally I thought it was very fitting and an accurate description of the guy in the video, as well as many of the people I have had the pleasure of growing up with here in Hawaii. If you meet all the criteria set fourth in the full description of Moke then yes, you probably are. But only being hawaiian/japanese would not qualify you for the criteria. Furthermore I don't care what race he is either. I have seen plenty of haole people who act just like this guy. Its just another dipshit acting tough with something he was not even involved in.
-
Couple questions: Was this guy Hawaiian? Did he have an education? Did he have a father? Lots of pent up anger.
Doubt he would've done anything if the people at the bench were these guys
(http://s.mcstatic.com/thumb/7807027/21128007/4/flash_player/0/1/boyz_n_the_hood_we_got_a_problem_here.jpg?v=2)
I don't think Doughboy had a CCW?!
Increase the peace Yo! O0
-
Conveniently you must not have read the rest of the description. Personally I thought it was very fitting and an accurate description of the guy in the video, as well as many of the people I have had the pleasure of growing up with here in Hawaii. If you meet all the criteria set fourth in the full description of Moke then yes, you probably are. But only being hawaiian/japanese would not qualify you for the criteria. Furthermore I don't care what race he is either. I have seen plenty of haole people who act just like this guy. Its just another dipshit acting tough with something he was not even involved in.
lol I know what you meant. Just having fun with this thread because it's stupid . Dude was very wrong on how he acted . Also has nothing to do with CCW . Keep calm and carry on
-
Couple questions: Was this guy Hawaiian? Did he have an education? Did he have a father? Lots of pent up anger.
Doubt he would've done anything if the people at the bench were these guys
(http://s.mcstatic.com/thumb/7807027/21128007/4/flash_player/0/1/boyz_n_the_hood_we_got_a_problem_here.jpg?v=2)
I don't think Doughboy had a CCW?!
Increase the peace Yo! O0
lol Doughboy
-
Reminded me of this classic Mafia scene...sometimes the so called tough guy ends up on the losing end when he messes with the wrong guy .
Joe Pesci - Casino (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxKiK-SeBhE#)
-
If you can't take a few angry words, you don't need a concealed weapon, you just need some vagisil.
Well said...
BTW, it not only "locals" that are drunk at the beach destroying property. On more than one occasion tourists or military have been arrested acting a fool at the beach.
I'm hawaiian/Caucasian. I guess I'm a moke with a college degree.
-
I'm Hawaiian /japanese so am I a Moke ?
A 'Moke', when used in a derogatory tense, is usually someone who makes the Hawaiian people look like complete fucking morons, and are therefore the embarrassment of our people. They tend to be individuals who believe that because they are of Hawaiian ancestry, everything they say/know about Hawaii its culture is correct. When speaking on issues within the Hawaiian community, they tend to blame a specific group of people, known as 'the evil haole man', for all the problems within the Hawaiian community. They then justify this point not with legitimate facts based upon the historical works of Hawaiian scholars such as Kamakau or Pakui, but rather from racist, idiotic, ideological ramblings from individuals of Hawaiian ancestry who, like them, can't speak their own language, know nothing about the true history of their people, and think that wearing HIC surf shorts with the island chain emblem, waving a sovereignty flag and having a Hawaiian last name and brown skin makes you Hawaiian, and that all the problems in their life are because the evil haole man stole their land and culture, all while they enjoy the luxuries and liberties that come with being an American.
i am not understanding where ccw comes into play here
yeah, ok, he's mouthy and advancing with his hands in his pockets, but at what point would you do anything with a concealed handgun?
please learn me
It comes into play because those who have been involved in situations like this know that if a guy is acting all crazy like, who knows what he might be capable of. Not sure if anyone here has had an aggravated individual pull a knife on them during an 'escalated conversation', or if anyone has seen or been blindsided with a brick or brass knuckles while attempting to take someone down, but that shit isn't fun to be apart of, and it sure isn't as romantic as they make it look in the movies.
Its funny how people say, 'yeah...I would have just beat his ass!' Ok...lets say you proceed to beat his ass, and he or his wonderful girlfriend in the background stabs you or somehow incapacitates you with some sort of designated/improvised weapon? You can give all the false cracks you want; I've seen too many individuals injured because they thought that they could Chuck Norris someone that they completely underestimated.
The firearm is, when used in these situations, an equalizer or gives its user the upper hand to take control of the situation. How does this video apply to CCW?
You ask him to stop and back up.
If he doesn't, you ask him again.
If he still doesn't, you tell him to back up with presentation of deadly force.
If he still doesn't, you neutralize the treat with deadly force, because anyone stupid enough to not take the first 3 hints and back off is probably stupid enough to seriously injure you.
Do you honestly think people would be acting like this idiot if CCW / Open carry were a normal practice? I highly doubt it. As the saying goes: 'An armed society is a polite society.'
Why do we carry firearms? So we can protect ourselves, our loved ones and our property from bodily injury/damage and/or death. If given the choice to neutralize the situation through unarmed combat or the ability to present/utilize deadly force, I am going to take the path of least resistance. And if you don't have what it takes to have that kind of mind set, then sit down and eat your lunch, because I hate you and you stole our land :rofl:
P.S. I forgot that we could also throw cats and butterflies at possible assailants, so maybe the CCW argument is invalid at this point.
-
As soon as intent, opportunity, capability are met - I'm not about to wait for shit to go down. I would have most likely tried to leave, if followed then I could pull the knife / spray.
You don't just get to run up on people and threaten them with harm.
"(2) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if the actor believes that deadly force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury."
Do I think it's necessary to use it? Well that depends. He looks wired, agitated, younger, more threatening, more athletic, and more capable of putting up a sustained fight then the average person. Serious bodily injury? Felony could be considered serious injury, and this guy is capable of that.
-
Damn, good to know where a few of you stand When it comes to a local yelling some racial slurs. As much as i love my 2A privileges, I hope some of you never get concealed carry, you dont deserve it. By the looks of some of the comments, we may see another "Deedy like" incident here if we had ccw.
I can just imagine what you might do if you came upon an impromptu haka or somebody gave you stink eye.
-
Damn, good to know where a few of you stand When it comes to a local yelling some racial slurs. As much as i love my 2A privileges, I hope some of you never get concealed carry, you dont deserve it. By the looks of some of the comments, we may see another "Deedy like" incident here if we had ccw.
I can just imagine what you might do if you came upon an impromptu haka or somebody gave you stink eye.
(http://www.network54.com/PersonalPhotos/1305280680.JPG)
-
Overreacting to the fear of what "could happen" is the sign of a true coward.
-
Overreacting to the fear of what "could happen" is the sign of a true coward.
Speaking of cowards....weren't you the guy who was talking all sorts of smack on the Roosevelt post, yet backed off when ImKu invited you to bench 80?
-
The firearm is, when used in these situations, an equalizer or gives its user the upper hand to take control of the situation. How does this video apply to CCW?
You ask him to stop and back up.
If he doesn't, you ask him again.
If he still doesn't, you tell him to back up with presentation of deadly force.
If he still doesn't, you neutralize the treat with deadly force, because anyone stupid enough to not take the first 3 hints and back off is probably stupid enough to seriously injured.
So you're going to use deadly force on someone because they you verbally told them to back off and they didn't???
The firearm should never be looked at as an equalizer or the upper hand as you described it. It is a tool used as a last resort to defend your life or someone else's life, after all other options have been exhausted, from deadly force, rape, or kidnapping.
You are the type of person I hope and pray never have the opportunity to carry concealed because you will fuck it up for others by power tripping.
Have fun in prison.
-
Damn, good to know where a few of you stand When it comes to a local yelling some racial slurs. As much as i love my 2A privileges, I hope some of you never get concealed carry, you dont deserve it. By the looks of some of the comments, we may see another "Deedy like" incident here if we had ccw.
I can just imagine what you might do if you came upon an impromptu haka or somebody gave you stink eye.
Being "haole", and having had to deal with this kind of behavior, I think there's a big difference between a guy standing in park yelling racial slurs, and someone rolling up in your face yelling "wat fukka".
Whatever these people did to attract this idiots attention aside, he was definitely showing intent to do bodily harm.
Under these circumstances, these simple rules have served me well;
Hit first.
Hit hard.
Hit often.
Repeat as needed until threat is neutralized.
As far as CCW, this situation only has merit as a "draw", "no draw" scenario. IMO it's no draw, unless a few of his buddies try to jump in and change the equation.
-
Whatever these people did to attract this idiots attention aside, he was definitely showing intent to do bodily harm.
Under these circumstances, these simple rules have served me well;
Hit first.
Hit hard.
Hit often.
Repeat as needed until threat is neutralized.
Showing intent or posturing is not actually causing harm. The easiest solution is to walk away.
Here is your simple rules, I added the penalty.
1. Hit first = Jail for assault. You have now become the aggressor.
2. Hit hard= Jail, see rule 1. Plus, imagine if he falls and hits his head and he dies. Prison time.
3. Hit often= Jail, and prison because you kept beating him after the threat was neutralized. See rule 1 again.
-
So you're going to use deadly force on someone because they you verbally told them to back off and they didn't???
The firearm should never be looked at as an equalizer or the upper hand as you described it. It is a tool used as a last resort to defend your life or someone else's life, after all other options have been exhausted, from deadly force, rape, or kidnapping.
You are the type of person I hope and pray never have the opportunity to carry concealed because you will fuck it up for others by power tripping.
Have fun in prison.
In most other places around the country, what that individual did constitutes assault. Hawaii has slightly different takes on things, and partners up assault and battery. So in this State this nutbags actions are considered Terroristic Threatening, at a minimum; an eager prosecutor could also probably swing TT1 on the first two elements of that offense. Additionally, because of his language and contempt for race, I gladly agree with them pushing a hate crime enhancement towards this individual.
Not only did the man in blue shirt ask him to stop, but the individual attempted on numerous occasions to retreat from the individual, who aggressively continued his pursuit. What tool is the individual supposed to use against an potentially agile and youthful attacker?
Death can happen on the first swing; which is why people don't get in trouble for shooting someone who is punching them. Serious bodily injury can be caused with kicks and punches as well.
The only thing missing here is 100% absolute clear intent. The dumbass only said that he was going to smash the phone; when he walks away though, some of that language sounds more threatening than what was said up close. If he walked back towards the individuals, I would consider that clear demonstration of intent. All that is let now is opportunity / capability. Does the subject have the capability of causing serious bodily harm? Yes. He's a young agile individual. Does he have opportunity? Yes. He is within physical proximity to me. At this point you have essentially met the use of force requirements in almost all States across the country. Hawaii has some pretty weak laws in this regard, but that's fine. In Florida, a person would only need to prove that we thought that the forcible felony was imminent, which I think the video shows pretty clearly; it especially would have shown that way if the individual stood his ground and told the guy to go away.
-
Showing intent or posturing is not actually causing harm. The easiest solution is to walk away.
Here is your simple rules, I added the penalty.
1. Hit first = Jail for assault. You have now become the aggressor.
2. Hit hard= Jail, see rule 1. Plus, imagine if he falls and hits his head and he dies. Prison time.
3. Hit often= Jail, and prison because you kept beating him after the threat was neutralized. See rule 1 again.
1. Wrong - you were within your rights to respond with force. You were authorized to respond with lethal force if you felt death or serious bodily harm could be involved.
2. Wrong - you are still on self defense.
3. Wrong - He even says stop when the threat is neutralized, which is his way of saying threat stops.
Additional points - I'm not going to abandon my wife at that table. No way in hell.
I also would have had no questions about spraying him. If he starts swinging, then that is him escalating the altercation to a point where lethal force is nearly without question authorized. You can't say I started the fight when you ran over to me. And, just to say, because someone will be like "you shouldn't tell someone what to do with their dog." People are well within their rights to tell you to stop doing that, it doesn't mean you get to come up to and threaten harm.
-
1. Wrong - you were within your rights to respond with force. You were authorized to respond with lethal force if you felt death or serious bodily harm could be involved.
2. Wrong - you are still on self defense.
3. Wrong - He even says stop when the threat is neutralized, which is his way of saying threat stops.
For most of the video he was just mouthing. At one point he Has his hands in his pockets. I saw no imminent threat. Only posturing and a lot of verbal aggression.
-
For most of the video he was just mouthing. At one point he Has his hands in his pockets. I saw no imminent threat. Only posturing and a lot of verbal aggression.
That's terroristic threatening and some demonstration of intent. If you look at my posts, I stated more along then lines of when he reached for the girls cell phone. If the other individual stopped and was pushed or touched in any manner it would have been game on. Also, posturing that close puts you in the "imminent" category. Go posture on a police officer like that, see what happens. You will most likely get tased or sprayed. If you swing, they may hurt you even more.
People just don't understand: You don't just get to do this shit to other people. Not sure why people think it's ok. It may have been how you grew up; you might even be used to it, or have been a part of it. But the larger portions of the country - won't stand for shit like this.
-
That's terroristic threatening and some demonstration of intent. If you look at my posts, I stated more along then lines of when he reached for the girls cell phone. Posturing that close puts you in the "imminent" category. Go posture on a police officer like that, see what happens.
You're not a police officer. You don't get to use that as an example. It would be different with a police officer because the officer has a weapon and he has to maintain a reactionary gap.
-
You're not a police officer. You don't get to use that as an example. It would be different with a police officer because the officer has a weapon and he has to maintain a reactionary gap.
Lol #facepalm. How is it different with a cop? Do you think that a Citizens does not get to maintain a 'reactionary gap' as you say to?
I've stood watch for law enforcement agencies carrying a gun, could you please tell me where this difference really falls into play? I've also carried a gun and stood armed posts in foreign countries where we are drilled routinely on use of force. The only reactionary gap I need to know is how close before a person will close distance and make contact / do harm to me. If they are within that distance then it just furthers the opportunity element.
-
Because the officer has a gun, in plain view, within reach. You don't. The officer has a duty to address the problem. You can retreat, the officer can't.
Additionally, I guarantee the officer wouldn't shoot him because he was aggressive, as some people on here suggested they would do.
-
Because the officer has a gun, in plain view, within reach. You don't. The officer has a duty to address the problem. You can retreat, the officer can't.
Plain clothes/undercover officer with concealed firearm? He'd "retreat" in the face of this behavior?
-
So you're going to use deadly force on someone because they you verbally told them to back off and they didn't???
The firearm should never be looked at as an equalizer or the upper hand as you described it. It is a tool used as a last resort to defend your life or someone else's life, after all other options have been exhausted, from deadly force, rape, or kidnapping.
You are the type of person I hope and pray never have the opportunity to carry concealed because you will fuck it up for others by power tripping.
Have fun in prison.
Totally agree!Speaking of cowards....weren't you the guy who was talking all sorts of smack on the Roosevelt post, yet backed off when ImKu invited you to bench 80?
Unlike u, I don't smack talk, and I welcomed meeting him. For better or worse, I don't have as much fear.
-
Obviously, he would identify himself, call for a uniformed patrol unit and attempt to defuse the situation. Again, He would not shoot the guy.
-
Because the officer has a gun, in plain view, within reach. You don't. The officer has a duty to address the problem. You can retreat, the officer can't.
Additionally, I guarantee the officer wouldn't shoot him because he was aggressive, as some people on here suggested they would do.
The guy already backed up. And no, I said you would almost with certainty get tased or sprayed - or hit with a baton. Those actions could lead to additional force.
I'm not really sure where you have studied or been trained on use of force, but it seems this conversation is going around in circles. You can believe or do what you want, but I know that for myself, I've been trained by 4 different commands on use of force, and stood watch understanding that use of force in multiple countries, multiple ports, and multiple posts as a sentry, roving security patrol, and auxiliary police officer. I also know that every firearms training company I have gone to - use of force is covered to the best of their knowledge based on current standards. Moreover, the Agency that I am currently with also teaches use of force up to and including lethal force.
-
That's terroristic threatening and some demonstration of intent. If you look at my posts, I stated more along then lines of when he reached for the girls cell phone. If the other individual stopped and was pushed or touched in any manner it would have been game on. Also, posturing that close puts you in the "imminent" category. Go posture on a police officer like that, see what happens. You will most likely get tased or sprayed. If you swing, they may hurt you even more.
People just don't understand: You don't just get to do this shit to other people. Not sure why people think it's ok. It may have been how you grew up; you might even be used to it, or have been a part of it. But the larger portions of the country - won't stand for shit like this.
ok, i realize that if we get CCW, we will most likely get education in this area, but at what point in this video would it be ok to let the aggressor know you are armed?
do you do the "expose the gun trick" like in the cowboy movies where they sweep their long jackets out of the way
do you blade yourself, put your hand on the hangun grip and get in weapons retention mode?
do you draw and keep the weapon at low ready with your finger off the trigger?
when and where do you do each step?
-
Lol we are giving this guy a lot of attention that he don't deserve. I wouldn't pull out a middle finger on this chump . If he scares you to pull out a weapon then it's no wonder your on a 2a forum . The only thing that looks threatening is probably his breath . There's nothing a good stiff jab followed by a right hook / right upper cut can't handle in this situation. It's a pit bull affect. He'll bark but you must not fear his bite . If you do your already bitten.
-
That's where the problem lies. Military use of force, while similar, is different from civilian use of force. At one time, The military was training soldiers in country to kick the guy in the nuts as a distraction before attempting to flexicuff them.
-
Showing intent or posturing is not actually causing harm. The easiest solution is to walk away.
Here is your simple rules, I added the penalty.
1. Hit first = Jail for assault. You have now become the aggressor.
2. Hit hard= Jail, see rule 1. Plus, imagine if he falls and hits his head and he dies. Prison time.
3. Hit often= Jail, and prison because you kept beating him after the threat was neutralized. See rule 1 again.
My friend, what I posted, I learned from hard experience. I've tried it both ways. I've found that my face hurts less if I don't get hit.
Waiting for someone to hit you is stupid if they're showing the intent to do so.
But hey, do what you want, it's your face. I'm only speaking for myself.
-
ok, i realize that if we get CCW, we will most likely get education in this area, but at what point in this video would it be ok to let the aggressor know you are armed?
do you do the "expose the gun trick" like in the cowboy movies where they sweep their long jackets out of the way
do you blade yourself, put your hand on the hangun grip and get in weapons retention mode?
do you draw and keep the weapon at low ready with your finger off the trigger?
when and where do you do each step?
In this situation, You never expose your gun. You accept the added maturity and responsibility that comes with carrying CCW, grab your shit and leave.
If you are carrying a gun so you can flex your muscles and say I got a gun at every opportunity you don't deserve nor have the maturity to be allowed to carry CCW.
-
ok, i realize that if we get CCW, we will most likely get education in this area, but at what point in this video would it be ok to let the aggressor know you are armed?
do you do the "expose the gun trick" like in the cowboy movies where they sweep their long jackets out of the way
do you blade yourself, put your hand on the hangun grip and get in weapons retention mode?
do you draw and keep the weapon at low ready with your finger off the trigger?
when and where do you do each step?
You wouldn't want to let him know you are armed until that gun is coming out under your control. If you did the "cowboy sweep" so to speak, it could alert him prematurely and then he could make a run for your gun or you and then you are stuck without it; this could also actually escalate the situation. Think about the Deedy trial where the witnesses basically said Elderts started taunting back, "So what, You gonna shoot me? Shoot me!" etc. Overall, you have to be able to justify it, and the way I teach people is that you need to decide: Is this about to be the worse day of my life and can I die or be harmed if I don't respond? If you can't answer both those yes - then you are not there yet.
Here is how I would try to play it out:
If a man approached my family in that manner, I would start out with verbal (Go away. Leave us alone. We are calling the police; and have someone do that last one). Recording is great, but you had (3) people at that table who could have been on the phone with 911.
If my family was at the table, it makes it difficult to just keep walking. I'm not going to just abandon all of our property and leave. I don't think anyone would do that. I would try to use that table as positioning and continue with #1.
If it keeps going at this point, we can try some verbal judo. "Look man - no one here wants problems, and you don't want to go to jail today." You can develop key phrases that are catch phrases to throw someone off-guard, making them think about the question / statement a little bit.
Next, I might back up some but with my arms extended around the chest or facial area. What would likely happen here is either he walks into me or pushes my hands away (both are forms of battery, which in most places is a forcible felony) and it just adds to the use of force justification.
At this point, it may be a go to present the firearm. Only you can decide this based on how threatened you are, how serious you think the threat is, and how likely it would be to cause bodily harm or death etc. If and when you do, it's best to have it out in close retention at this distance. Chances are when this guy sees a gun - he's going to go away (most incidents end like that). If he chooses to proceed, well, that's a decision he made and not you. This should also be accompanied with orders and primal language most likely. "GET THE FUCK BACK." et. As citizens, we are held to a much lower standard in the use of force; aside from that, individuals who are instructors or extensively trained, will likely be held to a higher standard as well.
For me, up until the point he tried to grab the phone with physical threats (robbery), I would have continued verbally. If I had spray on me, the guy would have got that as soon as I could get the can out. As far as retreating, we are also only required to retreat if we can do so with complete safety. Leaving my wife alone doesn't fit that description to me; that stuff is not happening - I won't leave her in a situation like that it's just cowardly. I would tell her to go away and she would likely listen.
-
Lol we are giving this guy a lot of attention that he don't deserve. I wouldn't pull out a middle finger on this chump . If he scares you to pull out a weapon then it's no wonder your on a 2a forum . The only thing that looks threatening is probably his breath . There's nothing a good stiff jab followed by a right hook / right upper cut can't handle in this situation. It's a pit bull affect. He'll bark but you must not fear his bite . If you do your already bitten.
+1 :thumbsup:
-
Totally agree!Unlike u, I don't smack talk, and I welcomed meeting him. For better or worse, I don't have as much fear.
LOL.
I really did laugh out loud on this one.
-
For most of the video he was just mouthing. At one point he Has his hands in his pockets. I saw no imminent threat. Only posturing and a lot of verbal aggression.
You're not a police officer. You don't get to use that as an example. It would be different with a police officer because the officer has a weapon and he has to maintain a reactionary gap.
Because the officer has a gun, in plain view, within reach. You don't. The officer has a duty to address the problem. You can retreat, the officer can't.
Additionally, I guarantee the officer wouldn't shoot him because he was aggressive, as some people on here suggested they would do.
Obviously, he would identify himself, call for a uniformed patrol unit and attempt to defuse the situation. Again, He would not shoot the guy.
That's where the problem lies. Military use of force, while similar, is different from civilian use of force. At one time, The military was training soldiers in country to kick the guy in the nuts as a distraction before attempting to flexicuff them.
In this situation, You never expose your gun. You accept the added maturity and responsibility that comes with carrying CCW, grab your shit and leave.
If you are carrying a gun so you can flex your muscles and say I got a gun at every opportunity you don't deserve nor have the maturity to be allowed to carry CCW.
My my...Its amazing how many experts in the field of CCW and LEO are emerging on the forum these days, especially since most of them lived in Hawaii most of their lives and have no LEO experience whatsoever.
-
:popcorn: now the fun starts
-
In this situation, You never expose your gun. You accept the added maturity and responsibility that comes with carrying CCW, grab your shit and leave.
If you are carrying a gun so you can flex your muscles and say I got a gun at every opportunity you don't deserve nor have the maturity to be allowed to carry CCW.
ok, we have one vote for i am not mature enough, and i accept that answer
i am not trained nor secure enough with my knowledge of laws and weapons handling at this point to carry
and we have one vote for verbal, then pepper/oc spray, then weapon only if forcibly threatened
anyone else have a contribution?
-
ok, i realize that if we get CCW, we will most likely get education in this area, but at what point in this video would it be ok to let the aggressor know you are armed?
do you do the "expose the gun trick" like in the cowboy movies where they sweep their long jackets out of the way
do you blade yourself, put your hand on the hangun grip and get in weapons retention mode?
do you draw and keep the weapon at low ready with your finger off the trigger?
when and where do you do each step?
I don't understand the context of your question.
Presentation of deadly force is drawing the weapon and informing the individual of your intent to fire should he continue displaying aggression towards you; no one in real life, that has actual experience in these situations, does that cowboy or blade shit. You draw, keep it at the ready, and tell the individual that if he continues that he will be shot.
So once again:
Ask him to stop
Tell him to stop
Present deadly force and tell him that if he doesn't stop, he will be shot
Shoot him if he doesn't stop
ok, we have one vote for i am not mature enough, and i accept that answer
i am not trained nor secure enough with my knowledge of laws and weapons handling at this point to carry
and we have one vote for verbal, then pepper/oc spray, then weapon only if forcibly threatened
anyone else have a contribution?
Why would you be carrying pepper spray if you are CCW? That defeats the whole purpose of CCW, because now you have just increased the total steps within your LOF. You plan on wearing a duty belt like a cop, complete with radio, gloves and handcuffs for citizens arrest? If you want pepper spray to be in your EOF, then just carry pepper spray.
I thought I told you to keep eating your lunch, Mac?!
-
My my...Its amazing how many experts in the field of CCW and LEO are emerging on the forum these days, especially since most of them lived in Hawaii most of their lives and have no LEO experience whatsoever.
Once again assumption is a bitch. You have no idea....
-
You wouldn't want to let him know you are armed until that gun is coming out under your control. If you did the "cowboy sweep" so to speak, it could alert him prematurely and then he could make a run for your gun or you and then you are stuck without it; this could also actually escalate the situation. Think about the Deedy trial where the witnesses basically said Elderts started taunting back, "So what, You gonna shoot me? Shoot me!" etc. Overall, you have to be able to justify it, and the way I teach people is that you need to decide: Is this about to be the worse day of my life and can I die or be harmed if I don't respond? If you can't answer both those yes - then you are not there yet.
Here is how I would try to play it out:
If a man approached my family in that manner, I would start out with verbal (Go away. Leave us alone. We are calling the police; and have someone do that last one). Recording is great, but you had (3) people at that table who could have been on the phone with 911.
If my family was at the table, it makes it difficult to just keep walking. I'm not going to just abandon all of our property and leave. I don't think anyone would do that. I would try to use that table as positioning and continue with #1.
If it keeps going at this point, we can try some verbal judo. "Look man - no one here wants problems, and you don't want to go to jail today." You can develop key phrases that are catch phrases to throw someone off-guard, making them think about the question / statement a little bit.
Next, I might back up some but with my arms extended around the chest or facial area. What would likely happen here is either he walks into me or pushes my hands away (both are forms of battery, which in most places is a forcible felony) and it just adds to the use of force justification.
At this point, it may be a go to present the firearm. Only you can decide this based on how threatened you are, how serious you think the threat is, and how likely it would be to cause bodily harm or death etc. If and when you do, it's best to have it out in close retention at this distance. Chances are when this guy sees a gun - he's going to go away (most incidents end like that). If he chooses to proceed, well, that's a decision he made and not you. This should also be accompanied with orders and primal language most likely. "GET THE FUCK BACK." et. As citizens, we are held to a much lower standard in the use of force; aside from that, individuals who are instructors or extensively trained, will likely be held to a higher standard as well.
For me, up until the point he tried to grab the phone with physical threats (robbery), I would have continued verbally. If I had spray on me, the guy would have got that as soon as I could get the can out. As far as retreating, we are also only required to retreat if we can do so with complete safety. Leaving my wife alone doesn't fit that description to me; that stuff is not happening - I won't leave her in a situation like that it's just cowardly. I would tell her to go away and she would likely listen.
Chris, maybe you shouldn't waste your time on this one anymore. Most of the individuals arguing against you are not operating at the same intellectual capacity with regards to this issue, and its only going going to stress you out trying to convince them otherwise.
Obviously we have guys who have watched a little bit too much UFC and a few youtube videos/magpul dvds and think they are now martial arts, LEO and CCW experts, even though they have no training or experience in the field, and are telling people who actually have training and experience in the field how to do things.
-
I don't understand the context of your question.
Presentation of deadly force is drawing the weapon and informing the individual of your intent to fire should he continue displaying aggression towards you; no one in real life, that has actual experience in these situations, does that cowboy or blade shit. You draw, keep it at the ready, and tell the individual that if he continues that he will be shot.
So once again:
Ask him to stop
Tell him to stop
Present deadly force and tell him that if he doesn't stop, he will be shot
Shoot him if he doesn't stop
Why would you be carrying pepper spray if you are CCW? That defeats the whole purpose of CCW, because now you have just increased the total steps within your LOF. You plan on wearing a duty belt like a cop, complete with radio, gloves and handcuffs for citizens arrest? If you want pepper spray to be in your EOF, then just carry pepper spray.
I thought I told you to keep eating your lunch, Mac?!
it's not lunchtime yet, q
and we're all just discussing and learning different viewpoints
and i will be wearing my batsuit with utility belt AND CCW (i will hide the gun in my codpiece)
so in your scenario above, when you present the deadly force, are you at low ready, or covering the guy with your finger off the trigger?
-
Chris, maybe you shouldn't waste your time on this one anymore. Most of the individuals arguing against you are not operating at the same intellectual capacity with regards to this issue, and its only going going to stress you out trying to convince them otherwise.
Obviously we have guys who have watched a little bit too much UFC and a few youtube videos/magpul dvds and think they are now martial arts, LEO and CCW experts, even though they have no training or experience in the field, and are telling people who actually have training and experience in the field how to do things.
discussions are not a waste of time
chris has far more experience and training than most of us, and his comments are valid
-
Once again assumption is a bitch. You have no idea....
Once again assumption is a bitch. You have no idea....
Would you like to tell us about your extensive experience?
Allow me to begin:
I was a former Navy SEAL who transferred to 1st Group Special Forces, and then went on to become a State Trooper who was so amazing, that they then proceeded to promote me to head of the SWAT team within 3 weeks. I am now the acting Chief of Police after just 6 months, because I am so awesome.
Of course, this actually happened within the past 5 min of my life, but hey who cares....its the internet, and I can type whatever I want and it will automatically be true.
Unless you can provide proof, or someone else can vouch for you, no one really cares about your imaginary training or experience.
Now please excuse me while I go watch a youtube video on DEA agents so I can add 'knowledge of DEA training/operations/procedures' to my training/experience resume
-
Once again assumption is a bitch. You have no idea....
Care to educate on experience and your training on escalation of force with your family there? Serious question, looking for education.
-
it's not lunchtime yet, q
and we're all just discussing and learning different viewpoints
and i will be wearing my batsuit with utility belt AND CCW (i will hide the gun in my codpiece)
so in your scenario above, when you present the deadly force, are you at low ready, or covering the guy with your finger off the trigger?
You should wear a modified codpiece revolver, fitted to shoot your OC/pepper spray. That way when you use it, you can scream 'JAPANEE SHISHI!' :rofl:
When I have presented deadly force in the past, it was always at the high ready because if I am at the point of presentation, it wouldn't take much more to escalate to deadly force, and I want to be in an advantageous position. Low ready is more of a traversing position, and to avoid flagging / friendly fire. During presentation of deadly force, you are presenting the possibility of death, so I would rather have my weapon locked on target while I make the point that if you continue demonstrating aggression towards me, you will be killed.
discussions are not a waste of time
chris has far more experience and training than most of us, and his comments are valid
I'm not saying discussion is a waste of time; I'm saying Chris is wasting his time trying to discuss valid points of which he has training on, and people keep pulling magical facts out of their ass to try and disprove his experience.
Geez Mac, you need to eat your damn lunch! You don't think straight without your fruit juice box!
-
Nah. Don't care to let everyone know what I do. There is a few people on this forum that have actually met me.
My family is priority. My first concern would be their safety not my pride. I would pack my shit up and leave immediately. My gun would stay hidden on my hip the whole time.
-
You should wear a modified codpiece revolver, fitted to shoot your OC/pepper spray. That way when you use it, you can scream 'JAPANEE SHISHI!' :rofl:
When I have presented deadly force in the past, it was always at the high ready because if I am at the point of presentation, it wouldn't take much more to escalate to deadly force, and I want to be in an advantageous position. Low ready is more of a traversing position, and to avoid flagging / friendly fire. During presentation of deadly force, you are presenting the possibility of death, so I would rather have my weapon locked on target while I make the point that if you continue demonstrating aggression towards me, you will be killed.
I'm not saying discussion is a waste of time; I'm saying Chris is wasting his time trying to discuss valid points of which he has training on, and people keep pulling magical facts out of their ass to try and disprove his experience.
Geez Mac, you need to eat your damn lunch! You don't think straight without your fruit juice box!
how do you know my codpiece isn't both holster AND OC dispenser?
ah, i forgot about high ready
makes much more sense to be at high ready, thanks
no fruit juice box for me, snickers really satisfies me
fun size, of course
-
:popcorn: now the fun starts
I am with you on this thread. I was just pointing out that no matter what color you are or what ethnicity you are claiming, if you are acting like dude in the video then you are an asshole. Period. Was speaking in general and I too think he is getting way too much attention. But I have a feeling karma will bite him in the ass someday. Hopefully it has really sharp pointy teeth! :shaka:
-
I am with you on this thread. I was just pointing out that no matter what color you are or what ethnicity you are claiming, if you are acting like dude in the video then you are an asshole. Period. Was speaking in general and I too think he is getting way too much attention. But I have a feeling karma will bite him in the ass someday. Hopefully it has really sharp pointy teeth! :shaka:
yup it will and I do understand where you were coming from . Just having fun on a thread were I knew it was going to get to this point of arguments by members . We all here for the same cause but yet could never agree on most things . Yet in arguments like this I do get to learn of people experience's tho hope not be in these situations. I had no lessons in this situation . Just a country kid trying to learn city ways . A moke is not Hawaiian , japanese , white, ect. He's just an idiot fueled on Heineken trying to take over the world one beach at a time . Q and Dblnaknak be easy . Be safe people
-
When I have presented deadly force in the past, it was always at the high ready because if I am at the point of presentation, it wouldn't take much more to escalate to deadly force, and I want to be in an advantageous position. Low ready is more of a traversing position, and to avoid flagging / friendly fire. During presentation of deadly force, you are presenting the possibility of death, so I would rather have my weapon locked on target while I make the point that if you continue demonstrating aggression towards me, you will be killed.
Ahhh. And there is the inexperience or just plain bad habit.
So you're going to pull your gun and be at the "high" ready to anticipate deadly force? In the real world that gun stays in its holster until you are already faced with deadly force and have already made the decision that deadly force is needed.
Are you even familiar with the use of force continuum and the de-escalation there of.
What if the situation de-escalates? Now you have to try and holster your gun while addressing the suspect. What if he is unarmed and now tries to tackle you? Do you use deadly force? I hope not. (Prison) I would love to be a fly on the wall when you explain to 12 jurors that you shot him because he tried to tackle you.
Unless your a cop, Putting yourself in a deadly situation is not justification for the use of deadly force.
-
I like f'ing white people, but now that I'm married I don't really have a choice.
-
My family is priority. My first concern would be their safety not my pride. I would pack my shit up and leave immediately. My gun would stay hidden on my hip the whole time.
I would agree with this. The guy is acting like an asshole, however use of deadly force is not warranted yet, IMO. Better to exit the area and keep everyone safe. Report incident to LE. Nothing else one could really do in the instance. Lose lose situation
-
Ahhh. And there is the inexperience or just plain bad habit.
So you're going to pull your gun and be at the "high" ready to anticipate deadly force? In the real world that gun stays in its holster until you are already faced with deadly force and have already made the decision that deadly force is needed.
Are you even familiar with the use of force continuum and the de-escalation there of.
What if the situation de-escalates? Now you have to try and holster your gun while addressing the suspect. What if he is unarmed and now tries to tackle you? Do you use deadly force? I hope not. (Prison) I would love to be a fly on the wall when you explain to 12 jurors that you shot him because he tried to tackle you.
Unless your a cop, Putting yourself in a deadly situation is not justification for the use of deadly force.
For someone with a vivid imagination, you sure are slow sometimes! Imagine drawing and holding your firearm, which you drew because you feared the guy would actually do what he just told you he would do to you, and then the aggressor tackles you and takes your gun from you.
I'd shoot him first. Anyone stupid enough to tackle someone holding a gun on them is also stupid enough to try and kill you over a stupid argument...
It's simple math: he terrorizes you verbally + you have a gun + he continues to attack
Gun drawn = reasonable fear of serious injury/death = upper hand
Attacker seeing he is outgunned continues = high/stupid/angry enough to kill
-
What if he is unarmed and now tries to tackle you? Do you use deadly force? I hope not. (Prison) I would love to be a fly on the wall when you explain to 12 jurors that you shot him because he tried to tackle you.
You're asserting that investigators, prosecutors and a jury would conclusively rule that an assault by an unarmed person could not possibly lead to a "reasonable belief" in imminent death or serious bodily injury? Mr. Martin was unarmed when Mr. Zimmerman defended himself with a weapon. Or are you claiming that (acquittal) could only happen in Florida, or never happen in Hawaii, given their respective laws?
-
Ahhh. And there is the inexperience or just plain bad habit.
So you're going to pull your gun and be at the "high" ready to anticipate deadly force? In the real world that gun stays in its holster until you are already faced with deadly force and have already made the decision that deadly force is needed.
Are you even familiar with the use of force continuum and the de-escalation there of.
What if the situation de-escalates? Now you have to try and holster your gun while addressing the suspect. What if he is unarmed and now tries to tackle you? Do you use deadly force? I hope not. (Prison) I would love to be a fly on the wall when you explain to 12 jurors that you shot him because he tried to tackle you.
Unless your a cop, Putting yourself in a deadly situation is not justification for the use of deadly force.
Dude, you keep talking all mysterious like you are some secret agent working for the CIA, yet you have provided no credentials whatsoever. And the points you keep trying to validate make you come off like some bloke who's only training came for some bullshit library desk security job.
Inexperience? If I am looking at someone, intending to use deadly force because they are continuing to be aggressive toward me after repeated requests to stop, and I have drawn my weapon, why twould I be in low ready? Not sure what kind of youtube training you got during your magical training sessions, but real cops and people who have been cops are very rarely, if never, at the low ready when escalating to presentation/intention of deadly force. Why? Because presenting means 'giving to', as in you plan to give a bullet to the individual if he doesn't stop. Why would you be in a 'ready' position if you are attempting to convince someone that they will die if they don't stop? Obviously if my gun is out of my holster, I have the intention to use deadly force should the situation escalate any further, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to present myself in the most intimidating position possible to try and deter the individual from either continuing his actions, or forcing me to escalate my level of force. What's scarier: having a gun pointed at you, or having a gun in a ready position?
And yes, I am quite familiar with both deescalation and continuum of force, as I taught both numerous times. What experience do you have, other than 'yeah...my job is so fucking top secret, that I'm going to play the 'I don't want to talk about my job' card'?
If the situation deescalates, the guy is either walking away, being restrained, dead or LEO has arrived to handle the situation. If you get up to presentation of deadly force and the threat isn't neutralized, then you are pretty fucking dumb for wanting to have a conversation with the guy, being that the reason you escalated to presentation of / deadly force is because you felt the threat of serious bodily injury and/or death. Why the fuck would you want to address someone after you basically told them to leave you alone or they will die? That is probably some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard with regards to CCW. What do you want to do, share some hugs and cookies with him after the situation deescalates? Get the fuck out of here.
And to you final point: YOU ARE ALREADY IN A DEADLY SITUATION IF SOMEONE IS THREATENING TO HURT/KILL YOU. If you can't see how someone who continuously threatens bodily harm / death after you have repeatedly told them to stop is a good basis for escalating force, then you need to go back to watching youtube videos and magpul dvds because you are making yourself sound pretty retarded.
-
Better to exit the area and keep everyone safe.
The "fuck white people" guy tells them to "sit down" several times. It seems he didn't want them to move or leave, but remain seated at the table. The "white people" complied and remained seated. You're suggesting that going against the shouted command of the "fuck white people" guy would have resulted in de-escalation?
-
I like f'ing white people, but now that I'm married I don't really have a choice.
Hahahahaha, nice break!! :shaka: :D
-
For someone with a vivid imagination, you sure are slow sometimes! Imagine drawing and holding your firearm, which you drew because you feared the guy would actually do what he just told you he would do to you, and then the aggressor tackles you and takes your gun from you.
I'd shoot him first. Anyone stupid enough to tackle someone holding a gun on them is also stupid enough to try and kill you over a stupid argument...
It's simple math: he terrorizes you verbally + you have a gun + he continues to attack
Gun drawn = reasonable fear of serious injury/death = upper hand
This is the reason why some of you don't have the maturity to carry concealed. You have no idea what the law requires to justify deadly force. You going to shoot an unarmed guy because he terrorizes you verbally? Really. You are so afraid of words that you feel compelled to take a life? Your ego is so big that you can't be the better man and walk away? I pray that you are never allowed to carry concealed.
The law doesn't cover reasonable fear. It states "fear of imminent death or serious injury. "
Initially I wasn't going to respond to this but it is so stupid I have to address it.
-
Dude, you keep talking all mysterious like you are some secret agent working for the CIA, yet you have provided no credentials whatsoever. And the points you keep trying to validate make you come off like some bloke who's only training came for some bullshit library desk security job.
Inexperience? If I am looking at someone, intending to use deadly force because they are continuing to be aggressive toward me after repeated requests to stop, and I have drawn my weapon, why twould I be in low ready? Not sure what kind of youtube training you got during your magical training sessions, but real cops and people who have been cops are very rarely, if never, at the low ready when escalating to presentation/intention of deadly force. Why? Because presenting means 'giving to', as in you plan to give a bullet to the individual if he doesn't stop. Why would you be in a 'ready' position if you are attempting to convince someone that they will die if they don't stop? Obviously if my gun is out of my holster, I have the intention to use deadly force should the situation escalate any further, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to present myself in the most intimidating position possible to try and deter the individual from either continuing his actions, or forcing me to escalate my level of force. What's scarier: having a gun pointed at you, or having a gun in a ready position?
And yes, I am quite familiar with both deescalation and continuum of force, as I taught both numerous times. What experience do you have, other than 'yeah...my job is so fucking top secret, that I'm going to play the 'I don't want to talk about my job' card'?
If the situation deescalates, the guy is either walking away, being restrained, dead or LEO has arrived to handle the situation. If you get up to presentation of deadly force and the threat isn't neutralized, then you are pretty fucking dumb for wanting to have a conversation with the guy, being that the reason you escalated to presentation of / deadly force is because you felt the threat of serious bodily injury and/or death. Why the fuck would you want to address someone after you basically told them to leave you alone or they will die? That is probably some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard with regards to CCW. What do you want to do, share some hugs and cookies with him after the situation deescalates? Get the fuck out of here.
And to you final point: YOU ARE ALREADY IN A DEADLY SITUATION IF SOMEONE IS THREATENING TO HURT/KILL YOU. If you can't see how someone who continuously threatens bodily harm / death after you have repeatedly told them to stop is a good basis for escalating force, then you need to go back to watching youtube videos and magpul dvds because you are making yourself sound pretty retarded.
You keep asking for credentials yet you supply none. I'm going to take a shit in the dark here because your reasoning is so fucked up.
You were either a military police officer or an infantry soldier stationed in Afghanistan or Iraq playing cop.
I bet I'm right. From what I know about their "training" it ain't that complicated. You were assigned that job because your ASVAB score was to low for anything else or you washed out of you original AIT/ ASFC or what ever the label is now.
So you care to tell us where you got your training from?
-
You're asserting that investigators, prosecutors and a jury would conclusively rule that an assault by an unarmed person could not possibly lead to a "reasonable belief" in imminent death or serious bodily injury? Mr. Martin was unarmed when Mr. Zimmerman defended himself with a weapon. Or are you claiming that (acquittal) could only happen in Florida, or never happen in Hawaii, given their respective laws?
Already addressed this. Read the earlier posts.
-
Being a relatively new member on the forum I've come to appreciate everyone's differing viewpoints. I've learned a lot by reading these topics and watching as the discussion naturally evolve. Let's not let this degenerate into another Roosevelt thread. :shaka:
-
LOL.
I really did laugh out loud on this one.
Im glad I made you smile, at least theres a positive thing that came out of this. I also apologize for calling you a coward, I did it in spite as i didnt really dig the troll thing.
Dont get what i said twisted, im not claiming to be tough. Nor am i condoning the braddahs outbursts/behavior but it doesnt phase me as much, maybe funtimes is right, I have seen this behavior before and I personally dont fear it. I have been in my fair share of fights and have been mobbed and knocked out/hospitalized. Still, I would not have even thought about use of a gun in the situation on the video. I am a Christian and I believe in GOD and HIS word. Namely HIS ten commandments, specifically "Thou shall not kill". If my beliefs put me in a precarious spot because I wouldnt kill someone. So be it. Its my choice/belief.
By what is in the video, I cant even say "turn the other cheek" first, as no physical contact takes place. I value life more than others, to me it seems there are SO MANY other opportunities to de-escalate the situation that can be attempted.
-
Im glad I made you smile, at least theres a positive thing that came out of this. I also apologize for calling you a coward, I did it in spite as i didnt really dig the troll thing.
Dont get what i said twisted, im not claiming to be tough. Nor am i condoning the braddahs outbursts/behavior but it doesnt phase me as much, maybe funtimes is right, I have seen this behavior before and I personally dont fear it. I have been in my fair share of fights and have been mobbed and knocked out/hospitalized. Still, I would not have even thought about use of a gun in the situation on the video. I am a Christian and I believe in GOD and HIS word. Namely HIS ten commandments, specifically "Thou shall not kill". If my beliefs put me in a precarious spot because I wouldnt kill someone. So be it. Its my choice/belief.
By what is in the video, I cant even say "turn the other cheek" first, as no physical contact takes place. I value life more than others, to me it seems there are SO MANY other opportunities to de-escalate the situation that can be attempted.
+1
-
Wow, how did I miss this gem of a thread... I don't know how often everyone gets out, but I'm sad to say this this type of behavior happens quite often. For those of you that say the guy in the video was "just mouthin off" (although I would argue that his movements were aggressive) and you could just walk away are fooling yourselves. Sure, some just like to hear themselves act tough, but others are looking to show off their physical dominance. Shit happens fast. Some of those types of guys may let you walk away, others are going to attack you whether you play the bigger man and try to walk away or not. When was the last time any of you strolled downtown or waiks at night? When was the last time you were false cracked for no reason? When was the last time you were jumped? When I was younger, I stopped going out because I swear I meet guys like that on the regular (but bigger) and I was tired of scrapping all the time (I've never been a fan of backing up). Some went way out of the way to just bump into me to cause trouble. It didn't matter if I tried to walk away or not. For those who have not meet me I'm not a small guy, and I swear I attracted some of the lamest locals who thought they could bang. Funniest one was while I was walking with my cooler and some locals insisted I give them a beer cuz their hawaiian... Good for you, me too... then one guy lost his shit, and that's when the fight happened.
The ignorance / arrogance of SOME of the locals make all locals look bad. Doesn't matter where you are, there is no shortage in assholes that act like the guy in the video.
As for CCW, I am soo torn on the issue as I am a 2A supporter. IMO one of the biggest questions is what do you do when an aggressive individual comes at you with no weapon. Are we going to say that we can accurately describe the level of fear that someone else is feeling? Not everyone has the same tolerances to dangerous situations. Some may perceive a danger where they really do believe that a aggressive individual may cause them serious bodily harm that may result in death, while others may be able to handle the situation without the need for CCW. Where is the line?
-
I was a jpo in elementary and jrotc in hs. So it should go without saying my elite training military and police level trumps everyone here. So let me school you on how to deal with the public as a civilian. Does it matter that civilian life is completely different than jpo/jrotc life? Lol no! When people breath it means they are clearly upping 02 in blood to ready for imminent attack. Kill them.
-
I was a jpo in elementary and jrotc in hs. So it should go without saying my elite training military and police level trumps everyone here. So let me school you on how to deal with the public as a civilian. Does it matter that civilian life is completely different than jpo/jrotc life? Lol no! When people breath it means they are clearly upping 02 in blood to ready for imminent attack. Kill them.
LOL....
-
Wow, how did I miss this gem of a thread... I don't know how often everyone gets out, but I'm sad to say this this type of behavior happens quite often. For those of you that say the guy in the video was "just mouthin off" (although I would argue that his movements were aggressive) and you could just walk away are fooling yourselves. Sure, some just like to hear themselves act tough, but others are looking to show off their physical dominance. Shit happens fast. Some of those types of guys may let you walk away, others are going to attack you whether you play the bigger man and try to walk away or not. When was the last time any of you strolled downtown or waiks at night? When was the last time you were false cracked for no reason? When was the last time you were jumped? When I was younger, I stopped going out because I swear I meet guys like that on the regular (but bigger) and I was tired of scrapping all the time (I've never been a fan of backing up). Some went way out of the way to just bump into me to cause trouble. It didn't matter if I tried to walk away or not. For those who have not meet me I'm not a small guy, and I swear I attracted some of the lamest locals who thought they could bang. Funniest one was while I was walking with my cooler and some locals insisted I give them a beer cuz their hawaiian... Good for you, me too... then one guy lost his shit, and that's when the fight happened.
The ignorance / arrogance of SOME of the locals make all locals look bad. Doesn't matter where you are, there is no shortage in assholes that act like the guy in the video.
As for CCW, I am soo torn on the issue as I am a 2A supporter. IMO one of the biggest questions is what do you do when an aggressive individual comes at you with no weapon. Are we going to say that we can accurately describe the level of fear that someone else is feeling? Not everyone has the same tolerances to dangerous situations. Some may perceive a danger where they really do believe that a aggressive individual may cause them serious bodily harm that may result in death, while others may be able to handle the situation without the need for CCW. Where is the line?
Talk about the ignorance/ arrogance of some locals... what happened to calling me out to bench 80? SMH LOL
-
LOL....
++
-
Talk about the ignorance/ arrogance of some locals... what happened to calling me out to bench 80? SMH LOL
What about it? Last thread you directed your insults at me and I said I would like to meet you. Take it how you like. Peoples attitude tend to change in person. Truthfully, I thought it would be cool to hash out our differences in person. If you really think that I am ignorant / arrogant, well everyone is entitled to an opinion. I have nothing to prove so I am going to refrain from trashing threads. In hindsight, I regret posting what you are referring to as I doubt we will ever meet.
-
Ohh I need more popcorn :popcorn: :popcorn: k got some the show can continue.
-
What about it? Last thread you directed your insults at me and I said I would like to meet you. Take it how you like. Peoples attitude tend to change in person. Truthfully, I thought it would be cool to hash out our differences in person. If you really think that I am ignorant / arrogant, well everyone is entitled to an opinion. I have nothing to prove so I am going to refrain from trashing threads. In hindsight, I regret posting what you are referring to as I doubt we will ever meet.
(http://higherunlearning.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/bro-hug.jpg?w=648)
-
(http://i996.photobucket.com/albums/af82/jonlagon72/cant-we-all-just-get-along_zps6719ca04.jpg) (http://s996.photobucket.com/user/jonlagon72/media/cant-we-all-just-get-along_zps6719ca04.jpg.html)
(http://i996.photobucket.com/albums/af82/jonlagon72/woosah_zps30a51f3c.gif) (http://s996.photobucket.com/user/jonlagon72/media/woosah_zps30a51f3c.gif.html)
:shaka:
-
What about it? Last thread you directed your insults at me and I said I would like to meet you. Take it how you like. Peoples attitude tend to change in person. Truthfully, I thought it would be cool to hash out our differences in person. If you really think that I am ignorant / arrogant, well everyone is entitled to an opinion. I have nothing to prove so I am going to refrain from trashing threads. In hindsight, I regret posting what you are referring to as I doubt we will ever meet.
Ahhh, maybe im the ignorant / arrogant local. I re-read the entire seven page thread, I see the post/s I made that was disrespectful and apologize. I agree that peoples attitudes change in person and think this could be hashed out easily.
-
(http://higherunlearning.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/bro-hug.jpg?w=648)
Faka! LoL
-
I really don't have anything useful to add to this conversation
-
It's like the desperate housewives of 2ahawaii . . :popcorn:
-
:rofl:
-
I really don't have anything useful to add to this conversation
Haha. I guess the moderator deleted my original post and wrote this. Sad! I guess there no free speech in this forum anymore.
-
Or your utter disrespect for vets and active duty was a disgrace to anyone that embraces this forum. Don't know how you have the ability to discredit ones military credentials without serving. Second hand info doesn't account for much.
-
Again, I say we need more black women.
If these honeys were there at the bench, the moke wouldn't say sh!t
(http://www.districtdiva.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/gabrielle-union-1600x1200-24831.jpg)
(http://www.atlantablackstar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Nia-Long-1.jpg)
badunkadunkdunk! O0 :thumbsup: :geekdanc:
-
Or your utter disrespect for vets and active duty was a disgrace to anyone that embraces this forum. Don't know how you have the ability to discredit ones military credentials without serving. Second hand info doesn't account for much.
Please. You don't know shit. I have served 10 years of active duty and 8 of national guard service. I'm calling him out on his bullshit.
-
Or your utter disrespect for vets and active duty was a disgrace to anyone that embraces this forum. Don't know how you have the ability to discredit ones military credentials without serving. Second hand info doesn't account for much.
There are vets just as bad if not worse than the guy in the ops vid. I embrace this forum and I didn't see anything wrong with dbls post. I'm a combat vet... If discredit someone elses service are you ok with it cause I've served? It's cool for q to shit all over hpd/cops without edits tho yeah? And honestly I don't care for cops in general
-
I'll repost what wrote later in case anyone want to read it.
-
I think this thread has lost it's value as an educational tool and turned into a pissing match. :stopjack:
-
I think this thread has lost it's value as an educational tool and turned into a pissing match. :stopjack:
Lol this thread was never intended to be educational. It's serving it's Intended purpose
-
Lol we are giving this guy a lot of attention that he don't deserve. I wouldn't pull out a middle finger on this chump . If he scares you to pull out a weapon then it's no wonder your on a 2a forum . The only thing that looks threatening is probably his breath . There's nothing a good stiff jab followed by a right hook / right upper cut can't handle in this situation. It's a pit bull affect. He'll bark but you must not fear his bite . If you do your already bitten.
But what if the guy in the video wasn't skilled in striking? Or had a hidden disability, like heart disease, asthma, or back problems that precluded him from engaging in such physical endeavors?
IMHO I think there are valid points (generally speaking)on both sides of this discussion and that each one trying to persuade the others (and hence the readers of this forum) should try to do so with facts and case law instead of vague references to super secret training or unstated "professional" experiences. There may be differing opinions on what may, or may not, constitute legitimate use of deadly force against an unarmed individual and the goal should be to educate yourself on different circumstances so that you are prepared in the event you have to make those decisions in the heat of a very stressful situation. The trier of facts, aided by the clarity of 20/20 hindsight, be it a jury or a judge, will view each circumstance differently and use a reasonable man standard to weigh the evidence and determine whether or not the use of deadly force was appropriate. That being said, based on the training I have had and the research I have done, I would say that in this particular case there wasn't a need to pull out a gun on the obnoxious punk...yet. But I can also see how it could have escalated to that point or that another individual, especially someone unfamiliar with the "local culture," or who was smaller or less capable of some hand-to-hand defense, might have evaluated the situation differently and legitimately felt compelled to use a firearm.
I agree that if you can leave, do so. Ego and machismo will not look good in retrospect while trying to defend your actions in court. I can also see the possibility that as you tried to leave, precisely because you wanted to avoid further confrontation and escalation, that Mr. We Hit Women and Dogs All The Time, may have become even more infuriated and tried to stop you. Recall that he told the guy to sit down. He could have interpreted trying to leave as a blatant disregard of his "command" and responded by escalating the situation.
I disagree that you cannot legally justify hitting someone preemptively based on your perceived risk of danger. As Justice Holms, in Brown v. United States said, "Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife." If you are cornered by someone like this, or can't leave because doing so would place others, such as your wife or girlfriend, in jeopardy, and he is increasingly encroaching on your "space" and you feel his attack may escalate soon, there is nothing that says you cannot strike first. Continuing your attack after the threat was eliminated would probably be deemed unwarranted, but I doubt several quick and continuous blows to disable the attacker would be seen as unjustified. The same principle can be applied to the use of a firearm. You need not wait until your attacker has pulled his gun, or his knife, or even hit you, depending on the circumstances, before you present your firearm. You also don't have to actually shoot once your gun "clears leather" either. If producing your firearm causes the assailant to stop his attack and backs away, shooting him would probably be seen as unjustified.
If you had other options, like pepper spray, and tried to use it but ultimately had to use your gun, it would probably be viewed in a positive light.
The bottom line is, IMHO, is that these discussions become more of a "I'm right and you're not" rather than an opportunity to learn from others. Even in the clarity of hindsight most self defense cases are shades of grey, not a clear cut, black and white case. To claim that it is always wrong to strike preemptively or that is never appropriate to shoot an unarmed person clearly shows either how little you know about the realities of self defense, or that your ego demands you always be correct. Regardless, it sheds little light on what is a complex, often nuanced situations.
It would be nice, as I said earlier, if positions and arguments could be based more on fact and case law, and that if one chooses to invoke the "in my experience" argument rather than in the aforementioned manner, that at the very least that experience was clearly stated so that the reader could evaluate the validity of said opinion themselves.
By no means an exhaustive or complete treatise on self defense, but an interesting read.....Oh, and the standard disclaimer: IANAL, this is not legal advice and represents my opinions only....
http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/Self-Defense-Cases.htm (http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/Self-Defense-Cases.htm)
-
Haha. I guess the moderator deleted my original post and wrote this. Sad! I guess there no free speech in this forum anymore.
There never was...this is a private forum, not a government agency, and they can, and do moderate some comments.
-
There never was...this is a private forum, not a government agency, and they can, and do moderate some comments.
Yeah ok. Q constantly degrades and attempts to bully other posters on the forum. In his post he degrades me, and hpd implying that everyone is an idiot compared to him. I respond to constant disrespect and my post get deleted. Haha. Censorship at its best.
Amazing.
-
Yeah ok. Q constantly degrades and attempts to bully other posters on the forum. In his post he degrades me, and hpd implying that everyone is an idiot compared to him. I respond to constant disrespect and my post get deleted. Haha. Censorship at its best.
Amazing.
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/Offended_zps4321b6bf.jpg) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/Offended_zps4321b6bf.jpg.html)
-
Yes HiCarry your right . (me) not knowing laws would of been wrong . If he had a disability then that's on him . As for me I do what I do best ..... Scream and run like a little girl . It got me thru high school and this far
-
Lol this thread was never intended to be educational. It's serving it's Intended purpose
LOL. I guess better to be pissed of then pissed on! :shaka:
-
Yes HiCarry your right . (me) not knowing laws would of been wrong . If he had a disability then that's on him . As for me I do what I do best ..... Scream and run like a little girl . It got me thru high school and this far
Lol
-
Q constantly degrades and attempts to bully other posters in the universe. In his post he degrades CPT Jean Luc Picard, and hpd implying that everyone is an idiot compared to him. I respond to constant disrespect and my post I get deleted sent to the Continuum. Haha. Censorship at its best.
Amazing.
It is quite FASCINATING
(http://www.treksinscifi.com/trekdaily/pictures/2008-06-29-Tapestry.jpg)
-
There are vets just as bad if not worse than the guy in the ops vid. I embrace this forum and I didn't see anything wrong with dbls post. I'm a combat vet... If discredit someone elses service are you ok with it cause I've served? It's cool for q to shit all over hpd/cops without edits tho yeah? And honestly I don't care for cops in general
Agreed, there are some bad vets, but that goes for anything. Like I said earlier, there is no shortage of assholes. But I'm not sure how that is relevant to what I commented on the post where Dblnaknak basically discredited Army credentials and laughed at his service (while I was unaware of his background). With that said, I was unaware that I stepped into a pissing match between different services (which I think is lame) or between each other, so I will leave that alone because for all I know those two actually know each other. BTW, no where in my post did I imply that shitting on HPD was ok either.
-
Yeah ok. Q constantly degrades and attempts to bully other posters on the forum. In his post he degrades me, and hpd implying that everyone is an idiot compared to him. I respond to constant disrespect and my post get deleted. Haha. Censorship at its best.
Amazing.
While I won't comment on your perception of this alleged bullying, mainly because I haven't had the opportunity to read all the posts from/between you two, I will say that I went back and read this post from the beginning. And it was you who started the roe by replying to a comment "Q" made, not to you, but others, with this remark:
You are the type of person I hope and pray never have the opportunity to carry concealed because you will fuck it up for others by power tripping.
Have fun in prison.
And while I don't think I'd be too offended by it (I have developed very thick skin...) I can see how one might. Additionally, this, and subsequent posts, seem to suggest to me (and hence I suspect other readers) that you believe only you have the correct answer to the question of "would a concealed weapon have been useful in this situation" and this attitude is quite apparent in your responses about preemptively striking someone. As I said, I think you made a valid point in suggesting you try to leave. I firmly believe the best gun fight is the one you're not in and that when you carry a gun you should try to avoid and deescalate situations such as this one. But, I also believe that others may interpret the situation differently and that may or may not result in a favorable court decision. It does no good to stand and say "I'm right, you're wrong" or to suggest that because a different opinion is presented that said person should "never have the opportunity to carry concealed..."
Do you have case law or specific, identifiable cases or instances where you could demonstrate your advice/opinion are correct? Share them. They would be more instructional and useful to those of us constantly trying to do the right thing in terms of protecting ourselves and our loved ones. I constantly try to read up on Defensive Gun Uses, the latest court decisions, and outcomes of self defense and gun cases. I'm pretty sure I have seen different, but similar self defense cases decided in different ways, meaning one was a justified use of force, the other not. You learn what you can, validate and evaluate the information available to you, use the experiences of others to help guide you in similar circumstances, and then make the best decision you can. As one very smart lawyer once said to me, anytime you go to court you're gambling.
-
Yes HiCarry your right . (me) not knowing laws would of been wrong . If he had a disability then that's on him . As for me I do what I do best ..... Scream and run like a little girl . It got me thru high school and this far
We all have to do what is right for us :-)
-
As soon as intent, opportunity, capability are met - I'm not about to wait for shit to go down. I would have most likely tried to leave, if followed then I could pull the knife / spray.
You don't just get to run up on people and threaten them with harm.
"(2) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if the actor believes that deadly force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury."
Do I think it's necessary to use it? Well that depends. He looks wired, agitated, younger, more threatening, more athletic, and more capable of putting up a sustained fight then the average person. Serious bodily injury? Felony could be considered serious injury, and this guy is capable of that.
3 24 12 Range Day with Moving Target Stands 8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzZjDULunEU#ws)
I would not mess with you! 1.3 seconds. You are pretty good.......
-
We all have to do what is right for us :-)
Come at me bro!
http://youtu.be/M4IfAuFBPow (http://youtu.be/M4IfAuFBPow)
-
While I won't comment on your perception of this alleged bullying, mainly because I haven't had the opportunity to read all the posts from/between you two, I will say that I went back and read this post from the beginning. And it was you who started the roe by replying to a comment "Q" made, not to you, but others, with this remark:
And while I don't think I'd be too offended by it (I have developed very thick skin...) I can see how one might. Additionally, this, and subsequent posts, seem to suggest to me (and hence I suspect other readers) that you believe only you have the correct answer to the question of "would a concealed weapon have been useful in this situation" and this attitude is quite apparent in your responses about preemptively striking someone. As I said, I think you made a valid point in suggesting you try to leave. I firmly believe the best gun fight is the one you're not in and that when you carry a gun you should try to avoid and deescalate situations such as this one. But, I also believe that others may interpret the situation differently and that may or may not result in a favorable court decision. It does no good to stand and say "I'm right, you're wrong" or to suggest that because a different opinion is presented that said person should "never have the opportunity to carry concealed..."
Do you have case law or specific, identifiable cases or instances where you could demonstrate your advice/opinion are correct? Share them. They would be more instructional and useful to those of us constantly trying to do the right thing in terms of protecting ourselves and our loved ones. I constantly try to read up on Defensive Gun Uses, the latest court decisions, and outcomes of self defense and gun cases. I'm pretty sure I have seen different, but similar self defense cases decided in different ways, meaning one was a justified use of force, the other not. You learn what you can, validate and evaluate the information available to you, use the experiences of others to help guide you in similar circumstances, and then make the best decision you can. As one very smart lawyer once said to me, anytime you go to court you're gambling.
:thumbsup:
-
and it made the news!
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24771687/racially-charged-rant-could-result-in-serious-charges (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24771687/racially-charged-rant-could-result-in-serious-charges)
-
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/moke_zps00bdddc1.jpg) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/moke_zps00bdddc1.jpg.html)
-
Agreed, there are some bad vets, but that goes for anything. Like I said earlier, there is no shortage of assholes. But I'm not sure how that is relevant to what I commented on the post where Dblnaknak basically discredited Army credentials and laughed at his service (while I was unaware of his background). With that said, I was unaware that I stepped into a pissing match between different services (which I think is lame) or between each other, so I will leave that alone because for all I know those two actually know each other. BTW, no where in my post did I imply that shitting on HPD was ok either.
I didn't even know about this service vs service thing. ???
And I too am trying to locate where I am shitting on HPD and Cops, given that I was at one time the guardian angel of all LEO on this forum. I'm pretty sure I said shitbag cops who gives out information that is going to get someone or their loved ones hurt or killed because they don't think individuals who threaten bodily injury and/or death is serious enough to escalate to presentation/application of deadly force.
I really don't care who you are; giving information that is going to get someone hurt makes you a Dbag
-
We all have to do what is right for us :-)
like I stated earlier some knowledge comes out of dispute
-
It is quite FASCINATING
(http://www.treksinscifi.com/trekdaily/pictures/2008-06-29-Tapestry.jpg)
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
3 24 12 Range Day with Moving Target Stands 8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzZjDULunEU#ws)
I would not mess with you! 1.3 seconds. You are pretty good.......
I'm happy with my shooting abilities. Thanks for posting a video from nearly two years ago =) Lots of people know me; lots of people have seen me shoot; many of them have held timers for me on it. Not saying anything that I haven't put to paper in front of other individuals.
More importantly, you completely missed the point of the post.
-
ok, we have one vote for i am not mature enough, and i accept that answer
i am not trained nor secure enough with my knowledge of laws and weapons handling at this point to carry
and we have one vote for verbal, then pepper/oc spray, then weapon only if forcibly threatened
anyone else have a contribution?
I encourage you to think about what we discussed in class about deadly force. There may be times when one is legally justified, but you still have a moral responsibility to try and avoid the conflict. Problems here are that turning away from this individual may provoke him more, or allow him the opportunity to blind side you. I, for one, would not turn away from this individual he's just too close for me not to give him full attention.
-
I encourage you to think about what we discussed in class about deadly force. There may be times when one is legally justified, but you still have a moral responsibility to try and avoid the conflict. Problems here are that turning away from this individual may provoke him more, or allow him the opportunity to blind side you. I, for one, would not turn away from this individual he's just too close for me not to give him full attention.
Chris, unfortunately I never took your class. Sorry.
Thanks for your input.
-
I'm happy with my shooting abilities. Thanks for posting a video from nearly two years ago =) Lots of people know me; lots of people have seen me shoot; many of them have held timers for me on it. Not saying anything that I haven't put to paper in front of other individuals.
More importantly, you completely missed the point of the post.
that's pretty cool . Not being an ass but when can I go to learn to better my hand gun techniques ?
-
This is my earlier post that got deleated by a moderator yet Q's post is still up bashing me. I cleaned it up a bit so he can use less vagisil.
You are right in that I was military police, but should note that my ASVAB was actually 121, with my lowest score being 105, and I volunteered to be an MP so I could have more credentials when I applied for the department you work at. Thank god I had common sense not to follow through with that, because then I'd have to work with bullshit cops like yourself who think that that just because they work for HPD, they actually have real time experience, talking about subjects they only learned about through some bullshit power point presentation.
To carry on, sorry; I didn't wash out of AIT. In fact, I was one of (6) individuals who were selected to be apart of the Accelerated Military Police Program (AMPs), which would mean that I was selected amongst ~170 soldiers, and had to maintain expert in every qualification and pass every exam with a minimum of 80%. Based on your limited knowledge of how to actually use a gun when it counts, I'd assume you'd be one of those guys that skated by with the basic marksman qual on all your weapon systems, am I right?
And Ding!Ding! You are right again in that I deployed to Afghanistan, only I volunteered to go because I wanted to earn my stripes as soldier, unlike you who were probably forced to go. And I don't know where you got this 'play cop' idea while deployed, but we conducted the same patrols that infantry units did, all while teaching Afghan National Police how to be cops. Would you like me to list my AOs as well?
And speaking on training and experience, rather than tell all my war stories, lets see what kind of training I actually had, shall we?
- MPI qualified
- Traffic department qualified
- PSD qualified
- Hostage Negotiation qualified, Level 1
- multiple joint operations with CID and MPI, to include multiple stings on instances of narcotics, child pornography, murder and rape *P.S. - I carried concealed for these :thumbsup:*
- Expert in EVERY weapon system I operated with, to include the M9, M4, 249, 240B, MK19, M2 and M203
- CIPs certified
- Army Combat Pistol certified, meaning that I was acting as JNCOIC or NCOIC when I was an E3/E4, instructing company and battalion sized elements in the use and operation of their pistol
- Army Combat Rifle certified, meaning that I was acting as JNCOIC or NCOIC when I was an E3/E4, instructing company and battalion sized elements in the use and operation of their rifle
- Combatives Level 3 certified
Would you like me to tell you how many tickets and people I pulled over as well? How about how many forced extractions my squad did in Afghanistan? Maybe how many actual QRF scenarios we were involved in? Would you like to total miles rucked by our squad in the 1 month we operated in an isolated AO with 10 Mountain and 3rd ID? Because I actually kept logs of almost everything I did. You know, like how real cops keep logs?
So now that I have divulged my training record, let the peanut gallery note that you STILL haven't provided any credentials other than the random whispers that you are HPD. And from your deep fascination with the fact that I was an MP and trying to discredit my legitimate experiences and training because you associate MP with a negative outlook, I'd assume that you were in some shit bag MOS, most definitely a POG of some sort. I think I'll go with something in intelligence; maybe a cook. Yes, I think I'll stick with cook.
If you were somehow apart of a combat arms unit, you were probably some shit bag soldier that couldn't take it, quit, and is now working in HPD because you were desperate for a job, due to your lack of legitimate training and/or experience. Oh, and I forgot to mention that the only reason you probably got your job has nothing to do with experience, but rather they are just looking to boost their numbers and prefer prior service members to save on training costs.
As a cop, you have probably never drawn your service weapon other than to qual, and you probably have never really been in a situation that required you to even use lower levels of force, such as OC or baton, because someone who has had to utilize their entire EOF table would probably know that the feature video is grounds for escalation to presentation of deadly force if the individual would choose to continue to be aggressive after multiple requests to stop, given that most people who CCW don't carry a OC or a baton, resulting in their EOF table being shorter than an LEO. The only experience you probably have is the same experience most other shitbag cops have, in that they assist other officers in taking down or booking a suspect, and claim that they actually did the work to win the heart of a girl who is dumb enough to believe your story. Any legitimate experience was probably had on the coattails of another officer, in which you will try to portray yourself as the officer who actually responded and handled the situation.
So :stopjack: I'm pretty sure that I have far more legitimate experience than you with regards to CCW and EOF, even though I'm just some fat has been who wants nothing to do with LEO anymore. Still, I'm sure my training and experience record will continue to walk circles around your training record for years to come, so please feel free to continue playing to the masses of how much more knowledgeable you are on the subject, even though you have yet to provide any legitimate evidence demonstrating you have experience on the subject :thumbsup:
Haha. I hit the nail on the head.
You was an ARMY MP stop acting like you was a real cop.
You turned in you gun at then end of your shift.
That explains a lot.
Let me break it down for you:
Strike 1, I'm not HPD as you assume, nor have I ever been HPD.
Strike 2, I'm not in the army as you assume. Nor, have I ever wanted to be in the army.
Strike 3, your army experience does not equate to civilian law enforcement. Stop imagining that it does. You are not the defining authority on use of force because it differs from civilian law enforcement and military. I know because I've attended some of your training that you claim.
Damn I cut a lot out of that. So if it gets deleted by the biased moderator PM me and I'll send it to you.
-
But what if the guy in the video wasn't skilled in striking? Or had a hidden disability, like heart disease, asthma, or back problems that precluded him from engaging in such physical endeavors?
IMHO I think there are valid points (generally speaking)on both sides of this discussion and that each one trying to persuade the others (and hence the readers of this forum) should try to do so with facts and case law instead of vague references to super secret training or unstated "professional" experiences. There may be differing opinions on what may, or may not, constitute legitimate use of deadly force against an unarmed individual and the goal should be to educate yourself on different circumstances so that you are prepared in the event you have to make those decisions in the heat of a very stressful situation. The trier of facts, aided by the clarity of 20/20 hindsight, be it a jury or a judge, will view each circumstance differently and use a reasonable man standard to weigh the evidence and determine whether or not the use of deadly force was appropriate. That being said, based on the training I have had and the research I have done, I would say that in this particular case there wasn't a need to pull out a gun on the obnoxious punk...yet. But I can also see how it could have escalated to that point or that another individual,especially someone unfamiliar with the "local culture," or who was smaller or less capable of some hand-to-hand defense, might have evaluated the situation differently and legitimately felt compelled to use a firearm.
I agree that if you can leave, do so. Ego and machismo will not look good in retrospect while trying to defend your actions in court. I can also see the possibility that as you tried to leave, precisely because you wanted to avoid further confrontation and escalation, that Mr. We Hit Women and Dogs All The Time, may have become even more infuriated and tried to stop you. Recall that he told the guy to sit down. He could have interpreted trying to leave as a blatant disregard of his "command" and responded by escalating the situation.
I disagree that you cannot legally justify hitting someone preemptively based on your perceived risk of danger. As Justice Holms, in Brown v. United States said, "Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife." If you are cornered by someone like this, or can't leave because doing so would place others, such as your wife or girlfriend, in jeopardy, and he is increasingly encroaching on your "space" and you feel his attack may escalate soon, there is nothing that says you cannot strike first. Continuing your attack after the threat was eliminated would probably be deemed unwarranted, but I doubt several quick and continuous blows to disable the attacker would be seen as unjustified. The same principle can be applied to the use of a firearm. You need not wait until your attacker has pulled his gun, or his knife, or even hit you, depending on the circumstances, before you present your firearm. You also don't have to actually shoot once your gun "clears leather" either. If producing your firearm causes the assailant to stop his attack and backs away, shooting him would probably be seen as unjustified.
If you had other options, like pepper spray, and tried to use it but ultimately had to use your gun, it would probably be viewed in a positive light.
The bottom line is, IMHO, is that these discussions become more of a "I'm right and you're not" rather than an opportunity to learn from others. Even in the clarity of hindsight most self defense cases are shades of grey, not a clear cut, black and white case. To claim that it is always wrong to strike preemptively or that is never appropriate to shoot an unarmed person clearly shows either how little you know about the realities of self defense, or that your ego demands you always be correct. Regardless, it sheds little light on what is a complex, often nuanced situations.
It would be nice, as I said earlier, if positions and arguments could be based more on fact and case law, and that if one chooses to invoke the "in my experience" argument rather than in the aforementioned manner, that at the very least that experience was clearly stated so that the reader could evaluate the validity of said opinion themselves.
By no means an exhaustive or complete treatise on self defense, but an interesting read.....Oh, and the standard disclaimer: IANAL, this is not legal advice and represents my opinions only....
http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/Self-Defense-Cases.htm (http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/Self-Defense-Cases.htm)
wow, well said HiCarry. Alot of alternatives discussed and some great points brought up. IMHO, i think the cause of the majority of the heartburn in this thread stems from the perception that the tendancy by some is to gain CCW to neutralize all threats. We are all individuals, we all have good days and bad days, and sometimes emotions do get heated. Its bothersome to me how easily and " ready " some ppl are to proceed to "use DEADLY force" without attempting to explore alternatives. Id also like to apologize for my behavior in the Roosevelt thread.
To others...
You guys are killing me (no pun intended) with the what if scenarios. Since there are so many " ifs " being brought up, ... let me have a little fun...
what if the aggressive local was defending his elderly father with a heart condition that got scared of the loose dog and hit the dog cuz it was unleashed in a public park and it almost bit him, and his 21 year old son, was reacting to being told not to hit the dog by the caucasian. The angry local was also suffering from a mental disability linked to PTSD he picked up in Afghanistan and he was frustrated about losing his job due to the poor economy the land that he used to own was taken in a foreclosure by the mortgage company that the caucasian guy coinsidentally owned.
Or
The Angry local was also a CCW advocate and believed in use of deadly force and when caucasian approached him about throwing something at the dog, the local considered it, intent, opportunity, and capability are met and popped a couple caps in the caucasian?
-
wow, well said HiCarry. Alot of alternatives discussed and some great points brought up. IMHO, i think the cause of the majority of the heartburn in this thread stems from the perception that the tendancy by some is to gain CCW to neutralize all threats. We are all individuals, we all have good days and bad days, and sometimes emotions do get heated. Its bothersome to me how easily and " ready " some ppl are to proceed to "use DEADLY force" without attempting to explore alternatives.
To others...
You guys are killing me (no pun intended) with the what if scenarios. Since there are so many " ifs " being brought up, ... let me have a little fun...
what if the aggressive local was defending his elderly father with a heart condition that got scared of the loose dog and hit the dog cuz it was unleashed in a public park and it almost bit him, and his 21 year old son, was reacting to being told not to hit the dog by the caucasian. The angry local was also suffering from a mental disability linked to PTSD he picked up in Afghanistan and he was frustrated about losing his job due to the poor economy the land that he used to own was taken in a foreclosure by the mortgage company that the caucasian guy coinsidentally owned.
Or
The Angry local was also a CCW advocate and believed in use of deadly force and when caucasian approached him about throwing something at the dog, the local considered it, intent, opportunity, and capability are met and popped a couple caps in the caucasian?
Now that's funny. A different side of the coin.
-
This is the reason why some of you don't have the maturity to carry concealed. You have no idea what the law requires to justify deadly force. You going to shoot an unarmed guy because he terrorizes you verbally? Really. You are so afraid of words that you feel compelled to take a life? Your ego is so big that you can't be the better man and walk away? I pray that you are never allowed to carry concealed.
The law doesn't cover reasonable fear. It states "fear of imminent death or serious injury. "
Initially I wasn't going to respond to this but it is so stupid I have to address it.
You think you can interpret the law for us? It's black and white:
§703-304 Use of force in self-protection. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 703-308,
the use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately
necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by the other person on the present occasion.
(2) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if the actor believes that deadly force is necessary to
protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, rape, or forcible sodomy.
There is no other standard applied, only the subject's BELIEF that force (deadly or not) is needed. What you call "afraid of words" the law calls verbal assault and terroristic threatening. Yeah, he might go away, or he might try to pull a Trayvon Martin. The dude was acting irrationally, and you are trying to play Monday morning quarterback! We already know the outcome, which makes it so easy for you to rationalize anything you want. In the same situation, 10 people will handle it 10 different ways. The one constant is the out-of-control ranter. Try and tell me if this happened to you, you would not have had any adrenaline flowing! That's a fear reaction. I doubt you are super-human! You would have been afraid ... I guarantee it!
If the person under assault BELIEVES he or his family are in immediate danger of serious injury, use of deadly force is justified.
The "reasonable person" test is the standard for courts to determine whether or not a reasonable person would have felt threatened to the extent deadly force would be a reasonable decision. This test is to prevent someone from justifying an overreaction by stating they were in fear for their lives.
It's very subjective, which is why there is such a test. I wonder how you pretend to know so much of the law and don't understand something so basic about this topic?
Please note: The word "IMMINENT" is nowhere there. Can you post a link to the reference you QUOTED above?
-
This is my earlier post that got deleated by a moderator yet Q's post is still up bashing me. I cleaned it up a bit so he can use less vagisil.
Haha. I hit the nail on the head.
You was an ARMY MP stop acting like you was a real cop.
You turned in you gun at then end of your shift.
That explains a lot.
Let me break it down for you:
Strike 1, I'm not HPD as you assume, nor have I ever been HPD.
Strike 2, I'm not in the army as you assume. Nor, have I ever wanted to be in the army.
Strike 3, your army experience does not equate to civilian law enforcement. Stop imagining that it does. You are not the defining authority on use of force because it differs from civilian law enforcement and military. I know because I've attended some of your training that you claim.
Damn I cut a lot out of that. So if it gets deleted by the biased moderator PM me and I'll send it to you.
So...
You aren't HPD and won't address requests for your credentials, even though credentials were provided to you when you requested them. Let it also be mentioned that you STILL haven't acknowledge if you are even LEO, so how is anyone to take your statements seriously if you have no legitimate backing? BTW, why are you telling people you are HPD if you aren't or never were apart of HPD?
You attempt to discredit my LEO and CCW experience because I was an MP, yet you still refuse to acknowledge which branch of service you were in or what your MOS was, which continues to place doubt into if you really served or not, specifically with regards to you saying 'I've attended some of the training you claim'. NEWS FLASH: Most of the training I've received is Army specific, so how would you have had the same training if you weren't in the Army? Sounds like BS to me.
You then say my experience isn't valid because I had to turn in my gun after my shift? NEWS FLASH: I lived off post. What can we have in our off post homes? Firearms. What can individuals do with their firearms in certain states? CARRY CONCEALED. So your failed logic fails to realize that just because someone turns in their service weapon after their shift, it doesn't prevent them from carrying concealed on their own time.
Finally, you say that my LEO experience doesn't equate to civilian LEO because what, we have extremely different procedures and EOF policies? NEWS FLASH: We enforced both Post AND state laws on base. What does that mean? All incidents were treated within the confines of not only post regulations, but state/county laws as well. What does this mean? It means we did the same damn thing that normal county cops and sheriffs did in the area, as we had to enforce the same laws and then some.
So being that you said you have '18 years of experience' in the military, that would make you at least 36-40 years old, meaning that your experience with active duty MP LEO is what, 1996-2003? Yeah, sorry to completely reconstruct the known world for you, but MPs aren't just gate guards and ID checkers like you might remember. They are a legitimate LEO force that, as stated, enforce post and state law, so you might want to update your fact base before you assume things that happened almost 20 years ago are still happening today.
-
1st there is no crime called verbal assault! Don't know where you got that one from. You might want to look up the elements required for TT.
2nd the threat had to be imminent. You can't justify deadly force because you think the guy might attack you with deadly force 10-20 minutes from now.
-
1st there is no crime called verbal assault! Don't know where you got that one from. You might want to look up the elements required for TT.
§707-715 Terroristic threatening, defined. A person commits the offense of terroristic threatening if the person threatens, by word or conduct, to cause bodily injury to another person or serious damage or harm to property, including the pets or livestock, of another or to commit a felony:
(1) With the intent to terrorize, or in reckless disregard of the risk of terrorizing, another person; or
(2) With intent to cause, or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1979, c 184, §1(1); gen ch 1993; am L 2012, c 214, §1]
2nd the threat had to be imminent. You can't justify deadly force because you think the guy might attack you with deadly force 10-20 minutes from now.
§703-304 Use of force in self-protection. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 703-308, the use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by the other person on the present occasion.
(2) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if the actor believes that deadly force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, rape, or forcible sodomy.
(3) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (4) and (5) of this section, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity thereof under the circumstances as he believes them to be when the force is used without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do, or abstaining from any lawful action.
To my and most other posters recollection, wasn't the cracked out guy claiming that he would physically harm the white male at that moment?
Figured you might need this to help you with the hole you are digging for yourself
(http://www.photo-dictionary.com/photofiles/list/7733/10396spade_shovel.jpg)
-
So...
You aren't HPD and won't address requests for your credentials, even though credentials were provided to you when you requested them. Let it also be mentioned that you STILL haven't acknowledge if you are even LEO, so how is anyone to take your statements seriously if you have no legitimate backing? BTW, why are you telling people you are HPD if you aren't or never were apart of HPD?
You attempt to discredit my LEO and CCW experience because I was an MP, yet you still refuse to acknowledge which branch of service you were in or what your MOS was, which continues to place doubt into if you really served or not, specifically with regards to you saying 'I've attended some of the training you claim'. NEWS FLASH: Most of the training I've received is Army specific, so how would you have had the same training if you weren't in the Army? Sounds like BS to me.
You then say my experience isn't valid because I had to turn in my gun after my shift? NEWS FLASH: I lived off post. What can we have in our off post homes? Firearms. What can individuals do with their firearms in certain states? CARRY CONCEALED. So your failed logic fails to realize that just because someone turns in their service weapon after their shift, it doesn't prevent them from carrying concealed on their own time.
Finally, you say that my LEO experience doesn't equate to civilian LEO because what, we have extremely different procedures and EOF policies? NEWS FLASH: We enforced both Post AND state laws on base. What does that mean? All incidents were treated within the confines of not only post regulations, but state/county laws as well. What does this mean? It means we did the same damn thing that normal county cops and sheriffs did in the area, as we had to enforce the same laws and then some.
So being that you said you have '18 years of experience' in the military, that would make you at least 36-40 years old, meaning that your experience with active duty MP LEO is what, 1996-2003? Yeah, sorry to completely reconstruct the known world for you, but MPs aren't just gate guards and ID checkers like you might remember. They are a legitimate LEO force that, as stated, enforce post and state law, so you might want to update your fact base before you assume things that happened almost 20 years ago are still happening today.
I never told anyone I was "HPD". For the record I am not HPD. Maybe the few that met me might of assumed I was HPD but never really asked. Don't know where you got that one from.
I was never a MP. Yet I've received advanced training in certain tactics.
I'm just sharing my experiences and 2 cents. I don't feel like I need to have a ego measuring contest with you concerning my past. It's irrelevant. You seem to be more concerned with other peoples past then the actual content of the message.
The bottom line is we can agree to disagree.
Let's move on. I'm tired of arguing with the retarded child in the room. You have your point of view and I have mine. You're more then welcomed to keep guessing tho.
-
I think everyone has given and received their various opinions on this topic. Lets watch the news and see what comes of this...