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

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...