quote:You would be 100% incorrect. Only 14 hits in 46 shots is absolutely pathetic though.
46 shots on anyone is too much no matter the situation
quote:+1quote:You would be 100% incorrect. Only 14 hits in 46 shots is absolutely pathetic though.
46 shots on anyone is too much no matter the situation
quote:Here's another one:
I'm going to save this article to throw at the next idiot that claims only police should be able to carry guns "because they've got the training". Yeah, no.
quote:
If you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about.
quote:
Niven's First Law
1a) Never throw **** at an armed man.
1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing **** at an armed man.You wouldn't think anyone would need to be toldthis. It dates from the Democratic National Convention of 1968. -Larry Niven
quote:Something tells me he wasn't on his medicine that day. If you are his mother and you know that he isn't stable when he is not on his medicine, wouldn't you make sure that he is on his medicine knowing something like this could happen because of his mental illness and "intolerance?"
"As long as he was on his medication and all, he did fine. It was when he wasn't on his medication that he was impatient. He'd sometimes become intolerant," Jewel told the ACLU. "But when he was on his medication, he maintained.
quote:Just to be clear, by "something like this," you mean "shot at 46 times, and hit 14 times, by people who also have an incapacitating device that wouldn't kill you?" Yep, definitely mom's fault instead of the cops'.
If you are his mother and you know that he isn't stable when he is not on his medicine, wouldn't you make sure that he is on his medicine knowing something like this could happen because of his mental illness and "intolerance?"
quote:Why would expecting cops not to kill people unnecessarily be a liberal stance?
I know that I sound like a liberal, but how does "Protect & Serve" translate to "Do whatever I tell you, or I (we) will just kill you ?
quote:I believe the story stated that a K9 officer charged the man and he pulled out a pocket knife in response. So he "technically" threatened a peace office allowing deadly force. Gotta love LEO semantics....
What happened to tranquilizer dart thingys ?
Technology to sedate someone ?
Why is it that law enforcement has to kill people who don't' do what they say. If the guy is not pointing a gun or bow or such at you, and threatening you or others with bodily harm, why is it necessary to kill them ?
I know that I sound like a liberal, but how does "Protect & Serve" translate to "Do whatever I tell you, or I (we) will just kill you ?
quote:
If you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about.
quote:Not just mine then, it seems. That thieving ho...
+1
Best logic in this thread.
quote:
What happened to tranquilizer dart thingys ?
Technology to sedate someone ?
Why is it that law enforcement has to kill people who don't' do what they say. If the guy is not pointing a gun or bow or such at you, and threatening you or others with bodily harm, why is it necessary to kill them ?
I know that I sound like a liberal, but how does "Protect & Serve" translate to "Do whatever I tell you, or I (we) will just kill you ?
quote:That 14th bullet certainly did the trick. The other 13 were just practice I guess.
They are shooting to end the threat.
quote:While I know you are trolling, LEOs are not trained to fire one shot, wait and see what results, and then fire more/another shot to repeat the process. They are taught to continue firing until the threat is neutralized.quote:That 14th bullet certainly did the trick. The other 13 were just practice I guess.
They are shooting to end the threat.