And here we go again...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

That's not how guns work.

First of all, shooting someone precisely in a small target area is quite difficult, especially if the target is moving and you are under stress.

Second of all, leg wounds can easily be lethal - look at the arteries and other goodies in there. I clip your femoral artery, and you are going to bleed out before the paramedics get there unless I happen to know how to slap a quality tourniquet on you, and happen to have one on me, rigged to apply rapidly.

Thirdly, handguns are not particularly good at stopping people, which is why we train to use multiple rounds until the attacker stops.

Firearms aren't stun guns, they don't work like the movies show.

---

I think I heard with this incident only 3 shots fired and not all connected with the target. Not excessive at all.

Quick Review Of What I've Been Saying: The pot-stirring Media is not liberal, it is there to cover events, as they happen, with paid advertising. Since there is considerable overlap between the News Media and Entertainment Media, they have found that sometimes they have a need to help to produce these events that they cover. Everyone is watching coverage & talking about these events, everyone has an opinion. Mission Accomplished. I would guess though, that the pro-protest movement(to put it nicely)and it's sympathizers are really a vocal minority, truth be known. Visualize a westboro church with say, 2 million members, instead of 2 dozen. See? Some of the sympathizers are just vocal & sympathetic, and that is all. Come down to it, they will put up and shut up. The Majority opinion is of course--supportive of the police, know that they are essential, see what they are up against: namely, thugs. The unfortunate thing is that the outrageous conduct by groups or individuals on behalf of the "pro-protest movement" is just going to cause a backlash. Though Politicians will go through the motions of trying to smooth things over, the underlying action that will be much greater in scope will be to increase the levels of security. That is because it is what the majority of citizens want. So, it will be more police, with more hardware, more jails, more courts, more prisons. That way, people who are prone to violence due to mental defect or whatever, can be kept out of society. Ramping up the power of our government at the domestic level, just to keep the peace. I am not saying I advocate this course of action--I'm simply speculating that that is what will happen. Again, if the Media was not so self-serving in making a show out of each and every incident to increase viewer- and readership, and focus on a wider range of more important matters, the rate of these incidents would settle down to a normal level, maybe even fewer. Hope that helps you some. Later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tradd

The derp on this one is astounding.

http://i771.photobucket.com/albums/x...ICIEAE4HuG.jpg

---

As anti-cop as I am, I have to say this is - at a minumum - some pretty twisted thinking. I'm no great fan of the police in general as you'all know by now, that doesn't need to be revisited as this point....that having been said, how would this person feel is a gun was pointed at them? What would be going through their mind - ummm....I'm thinking self preservation might be far up on this list?

Just wanted to check in and say I don't agree with this thinking either.....to me it's extreme as is some of the police behavior that is being brought to light since Ferguson. I don't know that in present day America the way things are set up now that there can be much of a solution, but I do believe this kind of thinking is not helping. As anti-cop as I am, I do believe that cops have the right to self defense if a weapon is pulled on them - and not some plastic toy weapon but the real thing. Confronted with a gun pointed at them, I think most people are going to fear for their lives and think in terms of self preservation/survival. Rob