Protests Across The Globe

formby002

Well-Known Member
Messages
414
1. Mace is a deadly weapon: https://goldsteinmehta.com/blog/is-mace-a-deadly-weapon-under-the-aggravated-assault-statute

2. I am a licensed defensive firearms instructor and I can tell you that any Hollywood notion of ‘aim for the leg’ is BS. You shoot to stop the threat. That’s it.

3. what on earth does this have to do with police reform? If a LEO is assaulted with mace, they are within their legal right to shoot in self defense.
Your country is fucking mad...

...unfortunately you're exporting your fucking madness to everywhere else.
 

Pimpernel Smith

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,369
Firstly, Mace isn't a deadly weapon its used to subdue people, and secondly he could have shot him in the leg, arm or with the aim of incapciating him rather than executing him, which is exactly what he did.

This should not need to be pointed out to you, but the fact that it does is revealing, especially when combined with your posts about de-funding the police and police violence.

You share the same convoluted thought processes' as Rambo and that's quite an achievement.
I agree, these ex-colonials seem to be wedded to the shoot to kill policy. Mace in our part of the world would not be considered a deadly weapon. I understand cops doing it getting ambushed by the cartels and various drug gangs, but in that case, a simple shot in the foot would have taught him a bloody good lesson in manners.
 

Dropbear

Member in Good Standing
Messages
3,880
I agree, these ex-colonials seem to be wedded to the shoot to kill policy. Mace in our part of the world would not be considered a deadly weapon. I understand cops doing it getting ambushed by the cartels and various drug gangs, but in that case, a simple shot in the foot would have taught him a bloody good lesson in manners.
You shoot to stop the threat. Anything more than that is murder.

Have you ever been teargassed in the face? Do you really think it would be ‘simple’ to shoot a charging attacker in the foot after being teargassed? While you are trying to guess where his foot is, he will be beating you down and taking your pistol away from you while you are incapacitated.
 

Pimpernel Smith

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,369
You shoot to stop the threat. Anything more than that is murder.

Have you ever been teargassed in the face? Do you really think it would be ‘simple’ to shoot a charging attacker in the foot after being teargassed? While you are trying to guess where his foot is, he will be beating you down and taking your pistol away from you while you are incapacitated.
If I was confident enough to be carrying, I would damn sure I wouldn't trigger happy around anyone carrying a less than lethal weapon.
 

Dropbear

Member in Good Standing
Messages
3,880
If I was confident enough to be carrying, I would damn sure I wouldn't trigger happy around anyone carrying a less than lethal weapon.
You do have a very Hollywood view of things.

The guy did his job and did the right thing defending himself and his team, from I’ve seen.
 

Pimpernel Smith

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,369
You do have a very Hollywood view of things.

The guy did his job and did the right thing defending himself and his team, from I’ve seen.
There's cultural differences going on here. In the UK to carry a gun outside of game and clay pigeon shooting (or being one of the few armed police) is not only illegal, but socially unacceptable. The above event, however justified in the USA, would and is seen as overkill and the person who did it would not only be embarrassed, but everyone would whenever he walked into an office or bar exclaim: ''Here he is that twat who shot someone dead because he got frightened and couldn't hold the line...'' Or words to that effect.

Edit:

 
Last edited:

Dropbear

Member in Good Standing
Messages
3,880
Police are going to charge the shooter, so it will be an interesting case:


Sounds like he may have been unlicensed, which would explain why they are slapping with the murder charge right now. It will never stick unless they can show intent, but they will plead out to a lesser charge:

 
Last edited:

Journeyman

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
3,593
The dude was assaulted by a deadly weapon, unprovoked, and defending himself.
I don't know what happened there. I saw some photos that showed the "Patriot Rally" guy hitting or slapping the bodyguard in the face, before then starting to spray capsicum spray in his direction. I don't know what may have triggered the situation.

Still, it seems insane to me that it ended up with someone being fatally shot.

I mean, if someone sprays capsicum spray at you, the sensible response seems to be to run away to a safe distance, not shoot the person in the chest. To be frank, it seems to me that the speed with which people in the US resort to the use of firearms is one of the big reasons for the current tensions around policing - both police and non-police are far too quick to use deadly weapons.
 

Dropbear

Member in Good Standing
Messages
3,880
Where the shooter falls into trouble is that he was acting as a licensed security/body guard, so he is held to a higher standard than a citizen defending themselves from an attack (similar to law enforcement), but was not actually licensed by the city to do so.

Also worth following is the story by police that a second firearm was seized (presumably belonging to the ‘victim’).

Pinkerton really screwed-up here and must be hiring a lot of liability lawyers right now to hang this guy out to dry.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom