Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
Well if the shoe fits.
I think that's kind of obvious. Girlfriend has already come out and said he didn't have a gun upon entering the store. Then the empty box was recovered in the sporting goods area in the rear of the store and the gun and shooting were recovered in the pet section in the front of the store. I would say he wasn't returning or purchasing. If you plan on purchasing, you kind of take the box with you.
Don't make me put you over my knee, boy.
Isn't that my line?
Not every itch needs to be scratched.
You're so damn demanding.
Not really. I do say "please" and "thank you."
Sure man, you're right - he deserved to be shot and killed for opening an air soft rifle and walking around with it at Wal-Mart - or no, I'm sorry, for not dropping the bb gun fast enough, or turning before he dropped it, or whatever miniscule fraction of a second he was given to reply before these trigger happy tyrants opened fire. I hope you're not a real firearms instructor. It's scary to know that such an irresponsible person is teaching other people firearms safety. I can't believe any reasonable person would stand behind this insanity.
If you are indeed an instructor, I'd hope that you could tell an airsoft replica from a real SCAR at close range.
I guess I'm a "stupid," and irrational, irresponsible person for thinking this way. My apologies.
BTW you spelled Instructor wrong.
Your looking for something that isn't there. Case of guilty before proven innocent.
You assumed the "trigger happy tyrants" just shot the guy for no reason. Other forum members on here have taken the due time to actually wait and sort out the facts of the case. They have and have graciously been providing them with all.
Based on those facts given it appears more and more like a good shoot. Not concrete since we have no video. But pretty close.
So just accept and wait till the next time a real "trigger happy tyrant" shoots a puppy or a kid or grandparent or all three because there will be plenty of jack a** out there who do wrong things. This just wasn't one of them.
Not meant as a personal attack but your post I quoted certainly sounded like a temper tantrum. Also it was laden with personal attacks of other members. Not good...but each to his own.
Be safe.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
If some one ever points a real or real looking gun at you I hope you have the presents of mine to ask is that real or is it a toy.
Do you really plan to shoot me or are you just fooling around.
Stupid people win stupid prizes.
...if read real carefully...the first statement in this post concerns what one might do should they find themselves in the same type of situation...
...the second statement points out that you don't have time to consider once the weapon is pointed your direction or moving your direction...
...the third statement refers to the deceased in this case...and that he behaved stupidly and reaped the results of his actions...
...nothing in the post can be correctly construed at calling any reader stupid...
...in fairness to the officers involved, those referring to the rifle held by the deceased as a toy are not being accurate...pellet and even BB guns have been mistaken for "real" guns often, with deadly results...and pellet guns are capable of inflicting great bodily harm and even death on those shot with them...as the stories here, for instance, show... https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=killed+by+a+pellet+gun
Not sure if you saw Firearms Iinstructor's post calling me stupid, but I think I'm allowed to defend myself against personal attack from someone who I have never had any correspondence with on this forum. You're welcome to read through all of my posts on this forum, as you'll find that I do not personally attack people, and this is the very first instance. It was not my intention to personally attack anyone, but to defend my position. I have learned through this experience whose posts should be ignored from this point forward.
I love how you tell me not to jump to conclusions yet in the same statement you claim the shoot is "probably good shoot." You also have the audacity to claim that I view the POLICE as guilty until proven innocent, when you seem to forget that a man is dead because the police thought of him in the exact same way - found guilty by the judge, jury, and executioner and sentenced to immediate death - by the police. OUT OF FEAR.
I'm not surprised that you think this to be a "good shoot," Primus. Your bias is evident. This is not a personal attack as it is an observation.
The coroner's opinion is that the killing is a homicide, so I'm not sure what "facts" you aware of that I'm not.
Again, the bit of "tantrum" or "emotion" you are sensing is both because an innocent man is dead at the hands of police with no charge against him, and the fact that I was insulted at the mere notion that I do not support the fearful "shoot first, ask later" mentality of the ever increasing militarized nature of police forces in this country.
If you'd like, we could actually debate this by going through our arguments step-by step, backing up every claim with factual evidence. I have no problem with that. It would be hasty, however, until the video is released.
I don't care if it was real or not. The officers were either justified or they were not based on if they or others lives were in danger. That is the big question that has not been answered. Did the man point the gun at officers or any other person that a reasonable person believes was a act of aggression. Sweeping does not count. If the man did indeed point the gun with what appeared to be malice, it was justified. If he was shot for contempt of cop, it was not.
I do not know, and until video is provided we will never know the real truth. I resent the remarks made by one that because some of us are not hanging the cops, that we have come to the conclusion it was a 'good shoot'. That person again is trying to put words in others posts that are not there, he should learn to speak only for himself.
--snipped--.... LEO should carry non lethal weapons.....
Beavercreek police chief Dennis Evers stood by his officers’ actions, saying that they fired after Crawford failed to comply with their commands to drop the air rifle
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/07/c...t-he-might-have-planned-to-buy/#ixzz39xOpI7jy
Soooo, anyone with a hearing problem or does not understand the yelling of the cop is sentenced to death?
I seee