Perhaps, a new approach....

I find this to be a terrific training video with respect to who should receive a shot to the heart or two shots to the head, at any given time.

It kept me guessing. I'd have pulled the trigger five times, so STOP pointing weapons at innocent civilian's, people. You WILL get yourselves killed.

Everyone armed, and everyone holstered is the ONLY way to solve this crisis.

As for a "new approach," if you expected a 'kindler, gentler' way of dealing with incredibly law-violating behavior, then you're just stupid.

Reality is, and if you're not towing the line, then you're on the down and out.

Life is, people. It is what it is.

Got a link anywhere for this video?

JoeSparky said:

Got a link anywhere for this video?

Click to expand...

Yeah, this sounds like something I want to at least take a look at.

Nemo

Sounds like it's advocating shooting people who are not 'bad guys' but someone in 'authority', a 'non-civilian'.

I'm saying 'no, that is NOT the way'.

You do not get any kind of 'justice' in the street. Never insert yourself, never employ a firing solution except to protect loved ones.

Maverick9 said:

snipp...

Never insert yourself, never employ a firing solution except to protect loved ones.

Click to expand...

well stated...

ipse

JoeSparky said:

Got a link anywhere for this video?

Click to expand...

I did. Thought I posted it, too. Mods? Admins?

Maverick9 said:

Sounds like it's advocating shooting people who are not 'bad guys' but someone in 'authority', a 'non-civilian'.

Click to expand...

Sound's like you're out of your gourd, Marverick9. I am a veteran, a retired military officer, and a law abiding citizen. I have NEVER advocated anything of the sort.

Are you merely pulling crap out of your backside before committing slander by fabricating some justification for a know-it-all response?

I'm saying 'no, that is NOT the way'.

Click to expand...

No s***, Sherlock. You really test my frosticles.

Back to JoeSparky: I'll see if I can find the video and re-post. It was a really good video!

since9 said:

I did. Thought I posted it, too. Mods? Admins?
Sound's like you're out of your gourd, Marverick9. I am a veteran, a retired military officer, and a law abiding citizen. I have NEVER advocated anything of the sort.
Are you merely pulling crap out of your backside before committing slander by fabricating some justification for a know-it-all response?
No s***, Sherlock. You really test my frosticles.
Back to JoeSparky: I'll see if I can find the video and re-post. It was a really good video!

Click to expand...

uh, since9, since you didn't post a link to your super duper video, yet provided the commentary you did, quote, terrific video...who should be shot in the heart, or two shots to the head...blah blah blah...unquote, seems taking your frustration out with name calling seems to be a shade inappropriate, wouldn't you think?

one would never believe a retired military service member would have such a low frustration tolerance or thin skin!

ipse

Well,,,

Solus; Since9 is a lost cause, their is no use trying to help him..
I saw his rambling incoherent post, without any link, before the 1st reply,,, but
like I said,, he is a waste of time!
Only God might know what he meant to say.... Since9 doesnt even know...

oh boy, did i ever do a tactical error which i wish i could undo...

curiosity queued, i took to al's invention to see what vid since9 was frothing so exceitedly about...

OMG...

myriad of videos in various scenarios showing tsa's active shooting guidance ~ run, hide, fight! of course all included the shock an awe of someone shooting individuals and viable horrified and panicked response from others in the video from the gitgo.

then, i apparently got on a different video stream and these videos show mass police presence assembling, getting dressed, etc., for war, er, no wait...call for responce to a shooter

darn, accidently, switched streams again, found myself watching videos showing military, police tactics dealing with active shooter.

ok, i can appreciate training videos to train employees, responders, and so forth, but there appeared to be at least a hundred in each category i stumbled mentioned.

i then began thinking and imagined the consequence(s) if a teen, or young adult, who is a loner, or ostracized by their cohort, or similarly outcast individual fed up with the treatment shown by cowokers would do if these type videos were watched.

the presentations showed the power the shooter has and commands, thru fear, over those who have bullied, or otherwise tormented them thus showing a viable methodology to get even.

these videos showed how responders are dressed as well as what tactics to use to get your kill numbers higher and the tactics used to clear facilities (orlando pd should have watched a couple of those vid cuz none advocated waiting 3 hours before entering).

training videos...yepper...training videos on how to facilitate a mass shooting from the shooter's perspective.

truly unbelievable.

12345A defender, et al., if since9 ~ retired military officer who might have seen active fire fights during their career, had watched these 'training' videos for any appreciable amount of time, it is no wonder his post was rambling as even i am shaken after only viewing partial, multiple videos...

ipse

1245A Defender said:

Solus; Since9 is a lost cause, their is no use trying to help him..
I saw his rambling incoherent post, without any link, before the 1st reply,,, but
like I said,, he is a waste of time!
Only God might know what he meant to say.... Since9 doesnt even know...

Click to expand...

Dear Moderators and Admins: Please enforce Rule (6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

If the forum members want to take me to task on my content, that's fair game.

Personal attacks such as the grossly unprofessional one above and others by Solus, however, ARE NOT.

Kindly enforce the rules.

In addition, perhaps the impetus behind attacks by either of these two stems from a general dislike/distaste for military service members, in which case you may wish to examine Rule (9) HATE IS NOT WELCOME HERE: Any posts attacking others based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity, or anything other than opposition to gun rights is NOT WELCOME HERE! We reserve the right to impose immediate bans for such behavior.

Thank you.

since9 said:

I did. Thought I posted it, too. Mods? Admins?

--snipped--

Back to JoeSparky: I'll see if I can find the video and re-post. It was a really good video!

Click to expand...

Not posted nor deleted/edited.

since9 said:

Dear Moderators and Admins: Please enforce Rule (6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

If the forum members want to take me to task on my content, that's fair game.

Personal attacks such as the grossly unprofessional one above and others by Solus, however, ARE NOT.

Kindly enforce the rules.

In addition, perhaps the impetus behind attacks by either of these two stems from a general dislike/distaste for military service members, in which case you may wish to examine Rule (9) HATE IS NOT WELCOME HERE: Any posts attacking others based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity, or anything other than opposition to gun rights is NOT WELCOME HERE! We reserve the right to impose immediate bans for such behavior.

Thank you.

Click to expand...

IMO - stretching the application of the rule beyond the intent.

The point being made has nothing to do with being for or against gun rights.

It would seem to be about the difficulty in following what you are trying to communicate. I for one have no clue.
It is the content or lack of it to which they complain.

A month to get here?

OC for ME said:

A month to get here?

Click to expand...

Haven't you heard? The mail is slow these days.

I just want to add that I was informed and impressed by the descriptive nature of the thread title. :banghead:

since9 said:

snipppp.

If the forum members want to take me to task on my content, that's fair game.

Personal attacks such as the grossly unprofessional one above and others by Solus, however, ARE NOT.

snipp...

In addition, perhaps the impetus behind attacks by either of these two stems from a general dislike/distaste for military service members, snippp...

Thank you.

Click to expand...

since9, please do not skew nor even begin to rationalize the criticism against the incoherent postings by you into any sort of real or imagined martyr building exercise by claiming 'these folk are speaking out against me cuz i was in the military'. it is an erroneous defense mechanism which will cause you grief in the other facets of your life if you allow this pattern to continue.

since9, nowhere have i disparaged your service while in the Air Force nor have i made my criticism personal towards you nor discussed your character flaws per se., but instead directed my commentary against the material presented.

btw, there are a great many women and men in our armed forces who serve or have served that you might not be aware of from your limited view so high in the sky!!

ipse

Yo, Since9, ignoring the various comments above, I would still like to see the video you originally referenced.

I assume you still have the link?

Nemo

Va_Nemo said:

Yo, Since9, ignoring the various comments above, I would still like to see the video you originally referenced.

I assume you still have the link?

Nemo

Click to expand...

No, I don't, which I plainly relayed to you. I looked for it, but could no longer find it.

Either my Google-foo or YouTube-foo is lacking, or they removed it.

My lack of access to the original, however, does not negate the derivative.