I've never been so frightened in my life

davidmcbeth · Feb 7, 2015

JamesCanby said:
Expanded the picture, laughed so hard I spritzed coffee out my nose .... cleaning the keyboard and screen now. I suspect we'll see that graphic again.

YEOW ! That's a spicy meatball.

skidmark · Feb 7, 2015

JamesCanby said:
Expanded the picture, laughed so hard I spritzed coffee out my nose .... cleaning the keyboard and screen now. I suspect we'll see that graphic again.

So how many tickets should I put you down for?

stay safe.

BTW - I am not responsible for your inability to swallow before viewing. You should know better by now.

user · Feb 8, 2015

skidmark said:
Look closely, grasshoppper. It's some sort of case around his stupid phone. But given the way in which they "communicate" as well as the messages they "communicate" it qualifies as a deadly weapon. (As in: Their spew will be the death of me.)

stay safe.

One of my very best favorite pet-peeves is the way the media always have to say something about someone being "unarmed" - particularly when they're armed with a two-ton vehicle that they'd been using to try to flatten someone else.

But seriously, whether a person is really, truly, most sincerely, and actually armed has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a shooting that killed him was justified. Just as irrelevant as whether or not the shooter "felt fear".

I quote myself here, "If you have a good-faith belief, based on objective fact, that you or another innocent person is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then you may use whatever degree of force is reasonably necessary under the circumstances to quell that threat." Notice that the requirement is belief, not fact and not fear. If a cop has stopped some dude for speeding in the wee hours of oh-dark-hundred and made the occupants of the vehicle get out and sit on the curb, and the passenger suddenly get up, reaches in his pocket and pulls out a shiny object which he operates with his free hand, making a clicking noise, then the cop, not being the slightest bit afraid, but reasonably perceiving under the "totality of the circumstances" that the passenger has pulled out a small, stainless semiautomatic pistol, has just chambered a round, and plans to shoot to kill, pulls out his own S&W 29-2 6.5" revolver in .44 mag. and takes the passenger's head cleeeean off, well you gotta ask your self one question: was that shooting justified? The answer is, "yes."; it makes absolutely no difference that the shiny object was a cigarette lighter or that the cop wasn't timid.

Now, if the passenger had used the phrase, "big boy", that might engender fear, but it's still irrelevant to the analysis.

Grapeshot · Feb 8, 2015

user said:
One of my very best favorite pet-peeves is the way the media always have to say something about someone being "unarmed" - particularly when they're armed with a two-ton vehicle that they'd been using to try to flatten someone else.

But seriously, whether a person is really, truly, most sincerely, and actually armed has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a shooting that killed him was justified. Just as irrelevant as whether or not the shooter "felt fear".

I quote myself here, "If you have a good-faith belief, based on objective fact, that you or another innocent person is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then you may use whatever degree of force is reasonably necessary under the circumstances to quell that threat." Notice that the requirement is belief, not fact and not fear. If a cop has stopped some dude for speeding in the wee hours of oh-dark-hundred and made the occupants of the vehicle get out and sit on the curb, and the passenger suddenly get up, reaches in his pocket and pulls out a shiny object which he operates with his free hand, making a clicking noise, then the cop, not being the slightest bit afraid, but reasonably perceiving under the "totality of the circumstances" that the passenger has pulled out a small, stainless semiautomatic pistol, has just chambered a round, and plans to shoot to kill, pulls out his own S&W 29-2 6.5" revolver in .44 mag. and takes the passenger's head cleeeean off, well you gotta ask your self one question: was that shooting justified? The answer is, "yes."; it makes absolutely no difference that the shiny object was a cigarette lighter or that the cop wasn't timid.

Now, if the passenger had used the phrase, "big boy", that might engender fear, but it's still irrelevant to the analysis.

And that boys and girls is how the story of the headless horseman got started. His enemies believed he was a threat.

The horseman himself is allegedly a Hessian soldier from the Revolutionary War who was decapitated by a cannonball.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headless_Horseman_(Legend_of_Sleepy_Hollow)

A .44 mag is a modern day, hand held cannon.

OC for ME · Feb 9, 2015

Who gets to decide what my good faith belief is, me or the state? So, Joe citizen pulls out a shiny object, around oh-dark-30, which he operates with his free hand, making a clicking noise...hmm, I suspect that my experiences after the shot will be largely different than a cop's experiences after the shot. Should it be? Does not sound like it should be any different, but I have my doubts.

davidmcbeth · Feb 9, 2015

OC for ME said:
Who gets to decide what my good faith belief is, me or the state? <snip>

You both do .. you first and the the state second and then the jury third (if it gets that far).

user · Feb 10, 2015

davidmcbeth said:
You both do .. you first and the the state second and then the jury third (if it gets that far).

I'd have said that a little differently. Whether or not the defender has a "good faith belief" is a question of fact, there really isn't any "decision" required. You believe something to be true, or you do not. Point is, you can't provoke someone into pulling a weapon on you and then claim you had a "good faith" belief. But once that's happened, you get to try to persuade a jury of the fact of your "good faith belief". So I think the answer to the question is, "yes."

davidmcbeth · Feb 11, 2015

user said:
I'd have said that a little differently. Whether or not the defender has a "good faith belief" is a question of fact, there really isn't any "decision" required. You believe something to be true, or you do not. Point is, you can't provoke someone into pulling a weapon on you and then claim you had a "good faith" belief. But once that's happened, you get to try to persuade a jury of the fact of your "good faith belief". So I think the answer to the question is, "yes."

That's more clear to the point you are making ... who would provoke someone like that? If you have any examples, I would like to read about them.

Neplusultra · Feb 13, 2015

user said:
One of my very best favorite pet-peeves is the way the media always have to say something about someone being "unarmed" - particularly when they're armed with a two-ton vehicle that they'd been using to try to flatten someone else.

But seriously, whether a person is really, truly, most sincerely, and actually armed has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a shooting that killed him was justified. Just as irrelevant as whether or not the shooter "felt fear".

I quote myself here, "If you have a good-faith belief, based on objective fact, that you or another innocent person is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then you may use whatever degree of force is reasonably necessary under the circumstances to quell that threat." Notice that the requirement is belief, not fact and not fear. If a cop has stopped some dude for speeding in the wee hours of oh-dark-hundred and made the occupants of the vehicle get out and sit on the curb, and the passenger suddenly get up, reaches in his pocket and pulls out a shiny object which he operates with his free hand, making a clicking noise, then the cop, not being the slightest bit afraid, but reasonably perceiving under the "totality of the circumstances" that the passenger has pulled out a small, stainless semiautomatic pistol, has just chambered a round, and plans to shoot to kill, pulls out his own S&W 29-2 6.5" revolver in .44 mag. and takes the passenger's head cleeeean off, well you gotta ask your self one question: was that shooting justified? The answer is, "yes."; it makes absolutely no difference that the shiny object was a cigarette lighter or that the cop wasn't timid.

Now, if the passenger had used the phrase, "big boy", that might engender fear, but it's still irrelevant to the analysis.

Exactly the point I made about the two cops that shot the young black kid who was brandishing a gun that the 911 caller said "probably wasn't real". The officers pulled up to the kid very quickly and the kid starts walking towards them, lifts his shirt, and starts to pull his BB gun out from his waistband. The cops shot him down. I have no doubt that the kid was merely trying to show the cops that it was not a real gun.

Here's the video of it taken by some security camera. You can see the kid lifting his jacket and the cop falling backwards as he reacts to what he had to have believed was a life threatening situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPK7vRKXkmI

Grapeshot · Feb 13, 2015

Neplusultra said:
Exactly the point I made about the two cops that shot the young black kid who was brandishing a gun that the 911 caller said "probably wasn't real". The officers pulled up to the kid very quickly and the kid starts walking towards them, lifts his shirt, and starts to pull his BB gun out from his waistband. The cops shot him down. I have no doubt that the kid was merely trying to show the cops that it was not a real gun.

Here's the video of it taken by some security camera. You can see the kid lifting his jacket and the cop falling backwards as he reacts to what he had to have believed was a life threatening situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPK7vRKXkmI

davidmcbeth · Feb 13, 2015

Grapeshot said:

I doubt you would have posted your post if it was a relative of yours.

12 year old kid died.

Your should not be praising killings like this.

Grapeshot · Feb 13, 2015

davidmcbeth said:
I doubt you would have posted your post if it was a relative of yours.

12 year old kid died.

Your should not be praising killings like this.

Most unkind, sir, particularly in light of the common knowledge of what is meant by that phrase. Wonder if your reply might have been different if the victim had been 70 yo.

I have had people to whom I had a distinct connection who have done really stupid things and paid the ultimate price.

Safety is an acquired/trained trait that in most cases will override stupidity.

You would seem to be intentionally provoking as I am very obviously not "praising killings like this" - that sir is a personal insult.

I stand by my response, within context.

I've never been so frightened in my life

davidmcbeth

Banned

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

user

Accomplished Advocate

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior

OC for ME

Regular Member

davidmcbeth

Banned

user

Accomplished Advocate

davidmcbeth

Banned

Neplusultra

Regular Member

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior

davidmcbeth

Banned

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior