You can't say that without begin in that position. IMO, carrying both could result in a hesitation if you were trying to decide which to grab. That hesitation could mean the difference in life or death. I'm saying, just carry the gun but be amply trained on how to use it to neutralize the threat without killing it first. Had Zimmerman, shot Martin in the knee, he could have taken some time to assess the thread from Martin before 1) waiting for backup or 2) shooting him dead.
Right, but the person shooting them was not trying to just would them I'm assuming? I'm sure the person pointing the gun at the deer was trying to kill it. So...yeah...not really the same. Not to mention the differences between the anatomy of a deer and a human.
At the very least he was following him which he was intsructed by real law enforcement officials not to do.
LMAO that bullet flying through the air could give a about the intention behind it. It's going to hit with a lot of kinetic energy and tear up...and bleeding to death is a plausible and even likely result. I can't believe you are actually trying to argue the point that a gun is a superior tool to use than a taser or pepper spray for non-lethal interdiction.
walking behind someone is not illegal.
I agree with you. Zimmerman was carrying a weapon whose only reasonable use is to kill with. Had he carried a taser, that boy would still be alive.
What do you think precipitated the fight?
So you witnessed the crime?
You're going to testify, right?
Of course not or there would be arrests made every second at the local HEB.
I don't think anyone is arguing that point. Fact still is, he was carrying a gun, he was getting the beat out of him, and he shot the guy beating him up.
The knee of a deer is tiny compared to that of a person. And the knee isn't the only viable target with threat neutralization targeting. It could be the shoulder, hand, foot, lower abdomen. Even the buttocks. Also, with my caliber limitation idea, Zimmerman would have never been approved for carrying a deer rifle.
But your comparing hunting deer to a neighborhood watch is very telling about your mentality.
I'm not arguing the gun is the superior tool if you are only talking about non-lethal interdiction. But that it gives you the option of lethal force that you don't have with pepper spray or a taser.
Two dumbasses making wrong assumptions about each other that escalated to a physical confrontation that then elevated to a deadly confrontation.
Thanks for making my point.
Your point was you think things really work like in the old westerns where the good guy could just shoot the gun out of the bad guys hand or "wing him" for a non lethal stop.
ing Roy Rogers...
Of course not. The guns in the "wild" west were not made for accurate pinpoint targeting. What I'm talking about it Gun Kata. Here's a decent example.
Your point was you think things really work like in the old westerns where the good guy could just shoot the gun out of the bad guys hand or "wing him" for a non lethal stop.
ing Roy Rogers...
Cosmic, would you call the cops on these guys if you saw them chilling down the street. They aren't on your property, they are just standing there down the street and talking.
If you are going to shoot someone, you shoot to kill. Period. You don't know what else they might have to come at you with.
Yes, their underwear is showing.Cosmic, would you call the cops on these guys if you saw them chilling down the street. They aren't on your property, they are just standing there down the street and talking.
I would probably just keep an eye on them but my neighbors might call the cops.Cosmic, would you call the cops on these guys if you saw them chilling down the street. They aren't on your property, they are just standing there down the street and talking.
You need to go back and read my posts from the beginning to catch up. If you use threat neutralization target training, by nature, you are neutralizing the target. Then you can take time to make your next move. Whether it be to call for backup or to use lethal force.
It was dark, it was raining, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating the out of him. I really think you're advocacy of "threat neutralization target training" in this situation is naive.
And I think that you probably have never fired a pistol.
Why? They are just minding their own business and talking. What about that figure propels one to call the cops on them?
What kind of question is this? If they don't live in the neighborhood and they are just "hanging out" then they deserve to be watched at the very least. I would just keep an eye on them. I wouldn't call the cops because I have a long driveway, a dog, and lots of guns. Some of my elderly neighbors might prefer to call the police and let them check them out. It is, after all, one of the police job descriptions. If nothings wrong then the cops won't do anything. No harm, no foul.
Once the cops come, the odds of "no harm, no foul" go way down. Remember, you said yourself, that law enforcement are trained to kill. So in your scenario, by calling the cops, the probability of someone getting shot are greater than 50%.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
