If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
A pretty decent gun related article for the media. I wish she would have also related it the average citizen in some manner, as well.
Overall it does. It shows that there is little time to think about shooting and training is an absolute necessity for carrying. Just cause a gun-owner can put holes in paper doesn't mean they have the mental discipline to make the right choice.
Most civilians don't go looking for trouble.
And how many cops have we seen lately that screwed the pooch with the decision they made?
In the back of my mind, I kept thinking how firing should be my last resort.
i dont think that was the issue that the article raised. The way i read it the deadly delay to act he spoke of is not based on how much or how little training he had but by the notion that returning fire could potentially lead him into a legal and financial clusterf***. a dilema the criminal does not share.
mental disciplines not the issue, its the lack of finanical fortitude to withstand the repercussions of his actions that cased him to hesitate.. this is why, i beleive at least, police with union lawyers can afford to "screw the pooch" more than civi's can..
======================================================Perhaps, but I didn't read it that way. The author never mentions financial considerations,
In the back of my mind, I kept thinking how firing should be my last resort. I knew deadly force is legally justified only if someone is facing imminent danger.
Sadly, people in states like MA been brow beaten into having to have more consideration for the criminals life than their own, because any life they may have after saving their own would likely be hardly worth living after the ensuing legal and financial ass-raping thats likely coming, even for a totally 100% righteous self defense shoot...If you don't know for a fact, you can shoot someone, why carry a gun.
Not at all.not directly but..
this statement says to me he was conflicted, considering the legal and inexorably bound financial repercussion of his actions instead of dealing with the threat at hand and placing both himself and others in danger.
He wasnt fighting the bad guy...he wasnt in the moment... he was fighting the district attorney in his mind before he ever even fired a shot, and was in fact too conflicted to even fire one in return even after being fired upon.. the result is he was shot and the bad guy got away.
And that may well be, but it doesn't answer the question about mindset. I can't recall a specific financial ass-raping recently, but I think you're starting at shadows.Sadly, people in states like MA been brow beaten into having to have more consideration for the criminals life than their own, because any life they may have after saving their own would likely be hardly worth living after the ensuing legal and financial ass-raping thats likely coming, even for a totally 100% righteous self defense shoot...
I'm not sure where you get your information, but I hardly think the police have a "kennel full of attorneys" anywhere.and i certainly think having the legal buffer of a kennel full of attorneys in ones corner could certainly help resolve and expedite the decision making process to fire..especially in a bass ackwards state like this.
interpretation is a subjective thing, its just my take on it.
I thought it was a very good article but I'm not to thrilled with the idea of "shooting" plastic bullets at live people I just can't get my head around this fact. I've been invited to go to a paint ball shoot more times than I can count but something in me says shooting people just for the fun of it just doesn't sit right with me.If I have to shoot someone it's a life and death situation not a game. Or am I being overly sensitive?
How about "attorneys on call whose fee will be paid by the taxpayer or union, rather than by liquidating retirement assets or taking out another mortgage."I'm not sure where you get your information, but I hardly think the police have a "kennel full of attorneys" anywhere.
How about "attorneys on call whose fee will be paid by the taxpayer or union, rather than by liquidating retirement assets or taking out another mortgage."
The attorney provided by the taxpayer has the municipality's interests in mind. The attorney provided by the union, payed for by dues and the attorney held on retainer again payed for by the officer represent the officer's interests.