CCW Incident (Input Please) Continued...

[Grognard Gunny]

Please, oh so enlightened one, explain what "Those like you" means, because you have no frikking clue who I am, or what I am like.....

Or perhaps you just have no clue what you are saying, That is an entirely possible thing from reading your posts.... Have you ever seen the true facts about how many times in an average year that firearms are used in self defense and are not even fired????

Here is a clue for your little brain.... it is in the MILLIONS! Maybe you were including me in those figures? but you would be INCORRECT in one aspect though.... of those MILLIONS of incidents each yr, it almost NEVER gets reported on the evening news, like you suggested it would be......

Well, that's the NRA's figures. I don't quite believe it is that many. However, I will concede that it is a high figure. Just how high......? Since many of the "encounters" are not reported, one must surmise that any "grand totals" are merely extrapolated from available "real" figures.

The anti gunners are not the only ones that "spin" statistics to make their "case", you know.

Just sayin'.

.... and for Pete's sake can you (and others) manage to make a point without the insults? It is a given that we have to endure a certain amount of adolescent name calling by some. Dropping down to that level of discourse.....? Well, let's just say it is unbecoming and detracts from your overall arguement. (Not that I don't get "involved" in the playgound childishness from time to time myself. Still doesn't sit well.... and I kick myself in the butt afterword for falling into the "game".)

GG

 

[B2Tall]

I see a few members of the "I Can't Wait To Shoot Somebody" gun club have arrived.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Sticks and stones Sparky. What the OP, Axeandra, and you are vomiting up is far more harmful.

Sorry what was the point you made again? I lost interest after you started name calling. Oh yes...I see it now. I haven't prescribed to attacking the victim of an assault or defending the actions of a criminal...I'll let you and the brady bunch do that.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Please, oh so enlightened one, explain what "Those like you" means, because you have no frikking clue who I am, or what I am like.....

Or perhaps you just have no clue what you are saying, That is an entirely possible thing from reading your posts.... Have you ever seen the true facts about how many times in an average year that firearms are used in self defense and are not even fired????

Here is a clue for your little brain.... it is in the MILLIONS! Maybe you were including me in those figures? but you would be INCORRECT in one aspect though.... of those MILLIONS of incidents each yr, it almost NEVER gets reported on the evening news, like you suggested it would be......

Well, that's the NRA's figures. I don't quite believe it is that many. However, I will concede that it is a high figure. Just how high......? Since many of the "encounters" are not reported, one must surmise that any "grand totals" are merely extrapolated from available "real" figures.

The anti gunners are not the only ones that "spin" statistics to make their "case", you know.

Just sayin'.

.... and for Pete's sake can you (and others) manage to make a point without the insults? It is a given that we have to endure a certain amount of adolescent name calling by some. Dropping down to that level of discourse.....? Well, let's just say it is unbecoming and detracts from your overall arguement. (Not that I don't get "involved" in the playgound childishness from time to time myself. Still doesn't sit well.... and I kick myself in the butt afterword for falling into the "game".)

GG

I think its highly unlikely. is name calling one of those walls you talked about earlier, where you can bang your head against them forever, but they will never come down?

 

[Glock Fan]

Sorry what was the point you made again? I lost interest after you started name calling again. Oh yes...I see it now. I haven't prescribed to attacking the victim of an assault or defending the actions of a criminal...I'll let you and the brady bunch do that.

The "criminal" was the irresponsible gun owner that drew down on an unarmed man. Had his behavior been "legal", he wouldn't have been arrested, charged and tried in court. The only thing that saved this individual from being convicted was the failure of the witness to show up.

The guy yelling and screaming at the OP was not arrested nor charged for some strange reason. Is this possibly because his behavior was "bad", but not "illegal"?

 

[Axeanda45]

Once again for the truly clueless (all you need to do is read their posts to know who they are...)

Unarmed does NOT equal safe, non-threatening, no danger, etc.....
The OP stated that to him, HE WAS IN FEAR FOR HIS AND HIS FRIENDS LIVES... Why is that so frikking hard for some of you to comprehend?

Just because a perp has no visible weapon, it does NOT mean he isnt a danger or life threatening, period...... To say any different is to show your total lack of real world knowledge or in my opinion, a total lack of any knowledge at all.... Even if he has nothing but his body, it is still VERY easy for him to maim or kill you, again, if you cannot fathom that fact either, you have no clue, and no idea how the real world works, all you have is fake hollywood ideas of real life, not the real thing....

 

[Axeanda45]

The "criminal" was the irresponsible gun owner that drew down on an unarmed man. Had his behavior been "legal", he wouldn't have been arrested, charged and tried in court. The only thing that saved this individual from being convicted was the failure of the witness to show up.

The guy yelling and screaming at the OP was not arrested nor charged for some strange reason. Is this possibly because his behavior was "bad", but not "illegal"?

Oh, I see where you are coming from (and it really stinks there)

You believe that the cops are always right, and arrest the correct person all the time..... So all of your assumptions are based off of that lie.....

All gun owners who protect themselves are now irresponsible according to you also.... Nice, what are you going to do for an encore? Blame the military for our wars?

 

[Axeanda45]

A very simple fact that those who have any real life experience knows is that the human body is extremely fragile.....

Those with martial arts training (like the OP) realise this even more than most.


Another fact the clueless here have shown ignorance of:

Have you ever seen a cat being threatened? What do they do? They show their claws and make themselves look dangerous as a defensive measure..... Many times that is enough, and the would-be attacker leaves for easier prey.....

 

[Panheadzz]

Then he should have jumped up with a round-house flying back kick, landed in a tae kwon do ninja stance, screamed a Bruce Lee scream and scared him away for easier prey.

 

[Rich_S]

Then he should have jumped up with a round-house flying back kick, landed in a tae kwon do ninja stance, screamed a Bruce Lee scream and scared him away for easier prey.

This.

The OP states he's a highly skilled martial artist who has defeated multiple attackers before. I believe he said he won a four on one fight. Why could he not defend himself against one single person?

 

[B2Tall]

We call those types, "Internet Rambos".

Note my signature line. I'm surprised the alpha sheepdog hasn't come bounding over yet. Several of his/her canine butt-sniffers are here :biggrin:

 

[localgirl]

Then he should have jumped up with a round-house flying back kick, landed in a tae kwon do ninja stance, screamed a Bruce Lee scream and scared him away for easier prey.

Dude, that's MY move.

And seriously, I'm just gonna put this out there...if you all want to engage in debate and actually go somewhere that isn't the playground, attack the IDEA not the PERSON. You don't really know the people here, just the ideas they write about.

Also, if you want to be taken seriously, please please please use proper grammar and spelling, or at least make it look like you TRIED.

I'm getting off my soapbox now to practice my MMA moves.

 

[Tony_Bones]

This was probably already stated somewhere in this long thread, but just in case it wasn't...
...everything you say can and will be used against you (including what you post here).

 

[Firefighterchen]

The "criminal" was the irresponsible gun owner that drew down on an unarmed man. Had his behavior been "legal", he wouldn't have been arrested, charged and tried in court. The only thing that saved this individual from being convicted was the failure of the witness to show up.

The guy yelling and screaming at the OP was not arrested nor charged for some strange reason. Is this possibly because his behavior was "bad", but not "illegal"?

You believe that the cops are always right, and arrest the correct person all the time..... So all of your assumptions are based off of that lie.....

This sums it up pretty well. The member rifleshooter I guys is a criminal in the eyes of glock fan, even though the other party lied, and the courts decided he was innocent, he was still arrested, therefore he is guilty and a criminal anyways.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Then he should have jumped up with a round-house flying back kick, landed in a tae kwon do ninja stance, screamed a Bruce Lee scream and scared him away for easier prey.

You have mixed Korean, Japanese, and Chinese in a very sad stereotypical way. For a learning experience...

1. Tae kwon do Korean.
2. Ninjas are Japanese (who main martial arts was ninjitsu).
3. Bruce Lee is Chinese who practiced kung fu.

This.

The OP states he's a highly skilled martial artist who has defeated multiple attackers before. I believe he said he won a four on one fight. Why could he not defend himself against one single person?

Like I said in my previous post. Tae kwon do is a standing very dance like fighting style. What if this attacker was a jujitsu, judo, sambo, or wrestling fighter? Once the fight hit the ground (which most do) the op would have been screwed. If one fight can determine all fights, than yes he could have defending against one person. But that's not life, there are new boxing champions, new mma champions, new martial arts champions all the time, cause there are always better fighters.

We call those types, "Internet Rambos".

Note my signature line. I'm surprised the alpha sheepdog hasn't come bounding over yet. Several of his/her canine butt-sniffers are here :biggrin:

Take note everyone. This is true trolling. There was no thought in this post. It does not have to do with the op. It's just an attack on other forum members to get a response. So when you call people a troll, think about this post, and decide whether any thought went into the post.

 

[Firefighterchen]

And seriously, I'm just gonna put this out there...if you all want to engage in debate and actually go somewhere that isn't the playground, attack the IDEA not the PERSON. You don't really know the people here, just the ideas they write about.

Also, if you want to be taken seriously, please please please use proper grammar and spelling, or at least make it look like you TRIED.

Also known as argumentum ad hominem. i think it would be more beneficial to try and stop the name calling first though. What say you?

 

[the dark]

Seems to me, right or wrong, guilty or innocent, that major message in this tale reflects something I read from Kelly McCann a while ago (and I paraphrase): If your only two options to protect yourself when confronted is to yell at someone or shoot them, then you are not really prepared.

Carry some form of non-lethal defense (and for all the tap dancing around, I would not qualify a handgun for brandishing in that category - that is as much as threat and a defense).

Carry a baton, kubotan, pepper spray, a taser - something you can use to defend yourself short of lethal force. Options between getting your ass beat and shooting someone have to be part of the plan.

 

[B2Tall]

According to the laws of most (if not all) states, if you're a healthy adult male, the threat of bare fists does not justify deadly force as a defensive measure. I'd venture to say that this applies in 99% of all such cases, certainly including the incident involving the OPer. In the eyes of the law, we're expected to take a bare-knuckle beating.

Personally, I understand the idea of drawing-down on somebody who's enraged and screaming threats from just a few feet away. In a critical situation like that our first instinct is to go with our best, surest defense. For CCers, that's often our pistol. The law doesn't see it that way, like it or not.

From a self defense standpoint, the problem with drawing in that situation is that it effectively takes any options other than shooting off the table should the BG choose to press home his attack. Blind rage, drugs/alcohol, mental instability, etc. could mean the perp just doesn't care about your gun. Now you pretty much have to shoot him....what else are you going to do?? He's only a few feet away and will be on you in an instant. And then you know what happens??? You go to jail facing some very serious charges. Just last night on the TV program "The First 48", a man was convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter because he shot and killed somebody who had run up on him at night, yelling at him with his arm outstretched. Turns out the dead guy didn't have a weapon and was probably just pointing his finger. I watch that program regularly and it was the first time I ever felt sympathy for a shooter on the show. Perfect example of what might happen if you draw on somebody who "might" be a "potential" threat.

And if he backs off?? Well, as our OPer found out, from a legal standpoint you may very well be at the whim of the thug who created this situation (and possibly at the whim of an anti-gun prosecutor or judge). The OPer is exceptionally lucky the guy didn't show up for court.

The bottom line is that you need to know the law and follow it whether you like it or not. If you choose not to then be prepared to face the consequences.

 

[B2Tall]

Which one, Unfettered Fright or JJFlash (Ah-ah) Gordon?

LMAO! Is it possible for a pack to have more than one alpha-male???

 

[Firefighterchen]

According to the laws of most (if not all) states, if you're a healthy adult male, the threat of bare fists does not justify deadly force as a defensive measure. I'd venture to say that this applies in 99% of all such cases, certainly including the incident involving the OPer. In the eyes of the law, we're expected to take a bare-knuckle beating.

Personally, I understand the idea of drawing-down on somebody who's enraged and screaming threats from just a few feet away. In a critical situation like that our first instinct is to go with our best, surest defense. For CCers, that's often our pistol. The law doesn't see it that way, like it or not.

From a self defense standpoint, the problem with drawing in that situation is that it effectively takes any options other than shooting off the table should the BG choose to press home his attack. Blind rage, drugs/alcohol, mental instability, etc. could mean the perp just doesn't care about your gun. Now you pretty much have to shoot him....what else are you going to do?? He's only a few feet away and will be on you in an instant. And then you know what happens??? You go to jail facing some very serious charges. Just last night on the TV program "The First 48", a man was convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter because he shot and killed somebody who had run up on him at night, yelling at him with his arm outstretched. Turns out the dead guy didn't have a weapon and was probably just pointing his finger. I watch that program regularly and it was the first time I ever felt sympathy for a shooter on the show. Perfect example of what might happen if you draw on somebody who "might" be a "potential" threat.

And if he backs off?? Well, as our OPer found out, from a legal standpoint you may very well be at the whim of the thug who created this situation (and possibly at the whim of an anti-gun prosecutor or judge). The OPer is exceptionally lucky the guy didn't show up for court.

The bottom line is that you need to know the law and follow it whether you like it or not. If you choose not to then be prepared to face the consequences.

See, thoughtful post with good points. As gunny puts it, we all fall for the game. My question to you is...

If the person is enraged, or on drugs, or has a mental instability issue, would they have the mental capacity to stop themselves if they found themselves over an unconscious victim? Would the victim have the abilities to stop such an aggressor (especially when it's shown that bullets have a hard time stopping said aggressors)?