Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Charlotte NC.
#21
The whole "shooting looters" thing kind of bothers me. Don't get me wrong guys. I'm colder than Attila the Hun on most things but I also value human life.
If I come home and find my wife being raped or my kids being murdered, then yes, I'm gonna empty half a mag from my G30s into the perps center mass. That being said, if I come home and see some butt head carrying my TV out the back door that's a little different. In that situation I'm probably going to let my wife hold the gun on the guy while I beat the living sh*! out of him.....then call the police. At the end of the day I can't justify taking another human life over an object that I can replace for a few hundred bucks.

As far as looters destroying Walmart or CVS, etc. My solution would be to simply not build any new shopping centers or stores in that neighborhood. You burn it, you loot it, you destroy it, then you do without it.
Reply
#22
(09-30-2016, 11:25 PM)Cougar90 Wrote: The whole "shooting looters" thing kind of bothers me.  Don't get me wrong guys.  I'm colder than Attila the Hun on most things but I also value human life.
If I come home and find my wife being raped or my kids being murdered, then yes, I'm gonna empty half a mag from my G30s into the perps center mass.  That being said, if I come home and see some butt head carrying my TV out the back door that's a little different.  In that situation I'm probably going to let my wife hold the gun on the guy while I beat the living sh*! out of him.....then call the police.  At the end of the day I can't justify taking another human life over an object that I can replace for a few hundred bucks.

As far as looters destroying Walmart or CVS, etc.  My solution would be to simply not build any new shopping centers or stores in that neighborhood.  You burn it, you loot it, you destroy it, then you do without it.

I can agree with this. Don't take on their mentality. The level of force should be used depending on the situation. 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Reply
#23
(09-30-2016, 11:25 PM)Cougar90 Wrote: The whole "shooting looters" thing kind of bothers me.  Don't get me wrong guys.  I'm colder than Attila the Hun on most things but I also value human life.
If I come home and find my wife being raped or my kids being murdered, then yes, I'm gonna empty half a mag from my G30s into the perps center mass.  That being said, if I come home and see some butt head carrying my TV out the back door that's a little different.  In that situation I'm probably going to let my wife hold the gun on the guy while I beat the living sh*! out of him.....then call the police.  At the end of the day I can't justify taking another human life over an object that I can replace for a few hundred bucks.

As far as looters destroying Walmart or CVS, etc.  My solution would be to simply not build any new shopping centers or stores in that neighborhood.  You burn it, you loot it, you destroy it, then you do without it.

They'd just move.'08.
If you look like food,you will be eaten.


I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


Quantity has a quality all of its own.
Reply
#24
I'm going to offer a different perspective;  it's situational.  If they're looting closed businesses then use tear gas, rubber bullets, dogs, hoses or whatever to motivate them to stop.  And you don't stop until they do.  You don't just stand by and watch/let them to it.

However...

If they're heading towards businesses, facilities, homes etc that are occupied then people are going to get hurt/killed.  Looters don't have any right to loot/riot much less hurt/kill innocent people.  Therefore deadly force should be an option if the above doesn't work in order to protect the innocent.

Additionally...

If they're starting fires...then use deadly force against them if necessary.  Why?  Because fire tends to get out of control quickly and then endangers the innocent as well as responding fire fighters.  

Additionally...

If they're attacking cars then that's deadly force and deadly force should be used against them in response.  If you're being car-jacked you can use deadly force to defend yourself.  So what's the difference if the police/N.G. use deadly force against those attacking the innocent in vehicles?  None.

Additionally...

You throw a deadly missile i.e. brick of some object which can cause injury to the police...you get shot.  Period.  In my opinion, if you have a police cordon (i.e. a bunch of guys in riot gear) then behind them should be Officer's with rubber bullets/bean bag shotgun to fire on those trying to pick up the tear gas canisters and/or generally acting like idiots and Officer's with regular long arms to fire on the idiot throwing whatever deadly missile they're using (bricks, pipe bombs, Molotov cocktail etc).  

But you don't stand there and allow them to 'act out' like savages!  Angry
Governmental dependance makes for poor self reliance.

"What could possibly go wrong with a duct tape boat?"  Cody Lundin

The best defense against evil men are good men with violent skill sets.
Reply
#25
Told to stand down.'08.
If you look like food,you will be eaten.


I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


Quantity has a quality all of its own.
Reply
#26
(10-01-2016, 04:04 PM)kirgi08 Wrote: Told to stand down.'08.

Yes, and we see how well that works  Sad
Governmental dependance makes for poor self reliance.

"What could possibly go wrong with a duct tape boat?"  Cody Lundin

The best defense against evil men are good men with violent skill sets.
Reply
#27
SOP,yer LEO.The reports will be months away.'08.
If you look like food,you will be eaten.


I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


Quantity has a quality all of its own.
Reply
#28
(10-01-2016, 03:51 PM)David Wrote: I'm going to offer a different perspective;  it's situational.  If they're looting closed businesses then use tear gas, rubber bullets, dogs, hoses or whatever to motivate them to stop.  And you don't stop until they do.  You don't just stand by and watch/let them to it.

However...

If they're heading towards businesses, facilities, homes etc that are occupied then people are going to get hurt/killed.  Looters don't have any right to loot/riot much less hurt/kill innocent people.  Therefore deadly force should be an option if the above doesn't work in order to protect the innocent.

Additionally...

If they're starting fires...then use deadly force against them if necessary.  Why?  Because fire tends to get out of control quickly and then endangers the innocent as well as responding fire fighters.  

Additionally...

If they're attacking cars then that's deadly force and deadly force should be used against them in response.  If you're being car-jacked you can use deadly force to defend yourself.  So what's the difference if the police/N.G. use deadly force against those attacking the innocent in vehicles?  None.

Additionally...

You throw a deadly missile i.e. brick of some object which can cause injury to the police...you get shot.  Period.  In my opinion, if you have a police cordon (i.e. a bunch of guys in riot gear) then behind them should be Officer's with rubber bullets/bean bag shotgun to fire on those trying to pick up the tear gas canisters and/or generally acting like idiots and Officer's with regular long arms to fire on the idiot throwing whatever deadly missile they're using (bricks, pipe bombs, Molotov cocktail etc).  

But you don't stand there and allow them to 'act out' like savages!  Angry

I don't see anything there that I disagree with David.  I guess what I was trying to say was.....I don't see the need to shoot another human being in the head because they're running out of a store with some sneakers or potato chips in a looting incident.  When fires start or bricks start flying, well, that's a whole different matter.  Fight force with equal force.  If deadly force is being used by looters against police or other civilians, then deadly force should be used to stop the threat.  The worst thing the police can do in the situation we're talking about is stand down....which is what they were told to do.  Mark my words.  The next riot will be worse because of this pacification tactic.
Reply
#29
(10-01-2016, 05:38 PM)Cougar90 Wrote:
(10-01-2016, 03:51 PM)David Wrote: I'm going to offer a different perspective;  it's situational.  If they're looting closed businesses then use tear gas, rubber bullets, dogs, hoses or whatever to motivate them to stop.  And you don't stop until they do.  You don't just stand by and watch/let them to it.

However...

If they're heading towards businesses, facilities, homes etc that are occupied then people are going to get hurt/killed.  Looters don't have any right to loot/riot much less hurt/kill innocent people.  Therefore deadly force should be an option if the above doesn't work in order to protect the innocent.

Additionally...

If they're starting fires...then use deadly force against them if necessary.  Why?  Because fire tends to get out of control quickly and then endangers the innocent as well as responding fire fighters.  

Additionally...

If they're attacking cars then that's deadly force and deadly force should be used against them in response.  If you're being car-jacked you can use deadly force to defend yourself.  So what's the difference if the police/N.G. use deadly force against those attacking the innocent in vehicles?  None.

Additionally...

You throw a deadly missile i.e. brick of some object which can cause injury to the police...you get shot.  Period.  In my opinion, if you have a police cordon (i.e. a bunch of guys in riot gear) then behind them should be Officer's with rubber bullets/bean bag shotgun to fire on those trying to pick up the tear gas canisters and/or generally acting like idiots and Officer's with regular long arms to fire on the idiot throwing whatever deadly missile they're using (bricks, pipe bombs, Molotov cocktail etc).  

But you don't stand there and allow them to 'act out' like savages!  Angry

I don't see anything there that I disagree with David.  I guess what I was trying to say was.....I don't see the need to shoot another human being in the head because they're running out of a store with some sneakers or potato chips in a looting incident.  When fires start or bricks start flying, well, that's a whole different matter.  Fight force with equal force.  If deadly force is being used by looters against police or other civilians, then deadly force should be used to stop the threat.  The worst thing the police can do in the situation we're talking about is stand down....which is what they were told to do.  Mark my words.  The next riot will be worse because of this pacification tactic.


Agreed.  In a non-deadly force situation let the tear gas/rubber bullets/bean bags fly.  If they take it up a notch...
Governmental dependance makes for poor self reliance.

"What could possibly go wrong with a duct tape boat?"  Cody Lundin

The best defense against evil men are good men with violent skill sets.
Reply
#30
(09-30-2016, 01:07 PM)kirgi08 Wrote:
(09-30-2016, 09:34 AM)Bob Wrote: But let's be realistic....

What REALLY happened in Charlotte that could not have been 99% avoided merely by situational awareness.  Being prepared for trouble is always very important.  But avoiding it is far more important.

With the very small exception of being on 85 that got shut down right at the choke point....more than completely avoidable.  Also, I find it somewhat hard to believe I would have trouble getting through with my vehicle.

I also believe that this roadblock crap needs to stop.
Disagree,they were looking for any reason to riot.If that cop had shot someones dog they would have.'08.

Another great example - cops shoot dogs far more often than necessary, or even appropriate.

If we work on it long enough...probably a lot of solutions. As usual, we engage in bad behavior modification with groups just like bad parenting.

The "shoot all looters" is probably supported by most people. Yet for all it is said - has it ever really happened? No - so we all know it's a joke. It's like mom saying I'm going to spank you for the 57th time. Whatever.

Now - a policy of cordoning off the area, and arresting ALL participants on suspicion - until processed....there you go. That will result in either a) Not protesting unless you really care, or policing your own.

No - you won't put in jail. We'll collect up all the merchandise outside the store, take prints from EVERYONE and run them all. You may need to wait a few days to get back to the real world however. We'll see how ok protesters are with that. Just need to be patient, have shoulder cams, and a lot of time to process....

I also agree with Dave on a proportional response.

I completely disagree with Cougar - basically what he is saying is that we can all come to his house, rob him, and it sucks for him. I am not a fan of deadly force period. That said - you SHOULD be allowed to protect BOTH your life and your property. Again - not knowing if I'll protect it with 911 or a 12g makes it an interesting proposition. Anyone have the robbery stats on places where it isn't allowed vs say Texas?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)