Oren wrote in
:

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:05:13 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Jan 4, 6:15*am, Jim Yanik wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote
y.net:
In article , jJim
McLaughlin wrote:
Jim Yanik wrote:
SNIP
I would have just shot the robber;2 rounds to the center of
body.

You might want to think about that. *Incident was in Indiana,
IIRC, not Texas.

Not a problem. Indiana law allows the use of deadly force not only
in self-defense, but in the defense of others also.

these days,robbers often shoot people *after they have complied*,for
no reason,and witnesses or bystanders too.

I'm NOT REQUIRED to act as a police officer and demand they
surrender,and it's too big a risk (and STUPID!!) to let THEM have
the first shot.

Their drawing and threatening with a gun puts me at risk just as
much as the one they are pointing the gun at.
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net- Hide quoted text -


Case of idiot civilians bitchign about cops use of force.

Spokane, WA last Friday (IIRC) vehicl chase, ends in foot pursuit,
perp cornered, pulls gun, gun battle, perp wounded.

No problem? Guess again.

News last night. Big uproar about the 'shoot'. People bitching about
whether the deputy fired first. Note that there is NO denial that
perp pointed his weapon at the deputy before the fun started.

Guess they think the perp should get a free first shot and return fire
is only to be directed at shooting the gun out of his hand.

I shouldn't be by now but I am constantly amazed at how stupid people
can be.

Harry K

Sounds like a Civilian Review Board (CRB) wanting to meddle in police
business. In Las Vegas we have a Coroner's Inquest to review
shootings by Police. Under Oath.

Note to self:

1) Dead perps don't testify

2) Don't let the facts interfere with a good report

Oren
--


I see nothing wrong with a civilian review board.(properly
trained/educated)
After all,the police DO work for US.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

In article ,
Jim Yanik wrote:


I see nothing wrong with a civilian review board.(properly
trained/educated)

and not politicized (probably the hardest of the three).


After all,the police DO work for US.

SteveB wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote

So do many other handgun manuevers. You do it your way, I'll do it
mine. Gawd, for supposed gun rights and ccw supporters who dislike
nanny government, you folks sure seem to like individual nannyism.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Any person who carries should know their weapon intimately. ....snip

I can't tell by that statement if you think I have a problem of not
knowing my weapon.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


Not at all, Dave. You are one of the few informed people here when
it comes to guns. The conversation becomes convoluted when it is a
group discussion, and I make statements that are intended for several
people, and not to just the poster. Sorry I was not specific. I
have no problems at all with your techniques for or reasons to carry.
I wish more people were as informed and experienced as you are.

Back 'atcha, Steve :-)

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote

So do many other handgun manuevers. You do it your way, I'll do it
mine. Gawd, for supposed gun rights and ccw supporters who dislike
nanny government, you folks sure seem to like individual nannyism.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Any person who carries should know their weapon intimately. ....snip

I can't tell by that statement if you think I have a problem of not
knowing my weapon.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


Not at all, Dave. You are one of the few informed people here when it comes
to guns. The conversation becomes convoluted when it is a group discussion,
and I make statements that are intended for several people, and not to just
the poster. Sorry I was not specific. I have no problems at all with your
techniques for or reasons to carry. I wish more people were as informed and
experienced as you are.

Steve

"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"Dave Bugg" wrote

So do many other handgun manuevers. You do it your way, I'll do it
mine. Gawd, for supposed gun rights and ccw supporters who dislike
nanny government, you folks sure seem to like individual nannyism.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Any person who carries should know their weapon intimately. ....snip

I can't tell by that statement if you think I have a problem of not
knowing my weapon.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


Not at all, Dave. You are one of the few informed people here when
it comes to guns. The conversation becomes convoluted when it is a
group discussion, and I make statements that are intended for several
people, and not to just the poster. Sorry I was not specific. I
have no problems at all with your techniques for or reasons to carry.
I wish more people were as informed and experienced as you are.

Back 'atcha, Steve :-)

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

To me, it's kind of like welding. I know how to weld. Better than 99% of
the people on this earth. I have passed serious x ray certs and have welded
underwater. But when I am at parties and hear discussions about welding, I
just sit back and don't get involved. At times it's amusing. Other times,
it's just fricking hilarious. I feel the same way about guns. Still
sometimes I need to and need to learn how to just pass on the bull**** and
not get involved in pig wrestling.

Steve

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote...

Did you ever carry a revolver? If yes, did you leave one hole in the
cylinder empty?

What purpose would that serve?..........

To increase you odds at Russian roulette?


Read the 2-3 messages before this one. Things will either make sense, or
they won't.

Do you even know how a revolver works?. Please explain any advantage
to having one chamber empty.


You never saw me suggest there was an advantage to doing that. If you
disagree, please point out the text which you believe represents the idea
you're suggesting.

And yes, I own two revolvers.


Your mere comment suggests that there may be a reason to leave a
chamber empty. There must be a reason. You mentioned it. Were you
being satirical?

Yep.

And while we're at that, someone did mention a reason in the quote above.

--
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali,
Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause
as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.

"clifto" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote...

Did you ever carry a revolver? If yes, did you leave one hole in the
cylinder empty?

What purpose would that serve?..........

To increase you odds at Russian roulette?


Read the 2-3 messages before this one. Things will either make sense,
or
they won't.

Do you even know how a revolver works?. Please explain any advantage
to having one chamber empty.


You never saw me suggest there was an advantage to doing that. If you
disagree, please point out the text which you believe represents the
idea
you're suggesting.

And yes, I own two revolvers.


Your mere comment suggests that there may be a reason to leave a
chamber empty. There must be a reason. You mentioned it. Were you
being satirical?

Yep.

And while we're at that, someone did mention a reason in the quote above.


I already did my time with toddlers. I enjoyed it very much, but here in
this newsgroup, I will not wait for them to catch up.