The coming days......
 

rangerssuck wrote:

Yes, I know he *said* he was adjusting his clothing, but I'm pretty
sure that what he meant was that he pretended to adjust his clothing
in order to make sure the people saw that he had a gun. In which case,
it was an act of violence. If that was not the case, then why bring
the whole incident up in the first place?

Which definition of violence does his action meet?

"vi?o?lence
/?va??l?ns/ S[vahy-uh-luhns]

–noun
1. swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2. rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by
violence.
3. an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against
rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4. a violent act or proceeding.
5. rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the
violence of his hatred.
6. damage through distortion or unwarranted alteration: to do
editorial violence to a text.

Is warning of the possibility of violence a violent act, like a doodle
of a gun is somehow threatening?

David

The coming days......
 

Yes, I know he *said* he was adjusting his clothing, but I'm pretty
sure that what he meant was that he pretended to adjust his clothing
in order to make sure the people saw that he had a gun. In which case,
it was an act of violence. If that was not the case, then why bring
the whole incident up in the first place?

How many unarmed people have been killed by police officers by making
suggestive moves? I'd say more than one but less than a million. There's
proof there that someone can read violence when there's none there. But the
point is, it buys time for a victim if the perp thinks they MAY be armed.
There's no foul for acting. Unless it's in front of a LEO.

Steve

The coming days......
 

On Jul 13, 1:34*am, "SteveB" wrote:
Yes, I know he *said* he was adjusting his clothing, but I'm pretty
sure that what he meant was that he pretended to adjust his clothing
in order to make sure the people saw that he had a gun. In which case,
it was an act of violence. If that was not the case, then why bring
the whole incident up in the first place?

How many unarmed people have been killed by police officers by making
suggestive moves? *I'd say more than one but less than a million. *There's
proof there that someone can read violence when there's none there. *But the
point is, it buys time for a victim if the perp thinks they MAY be armed.
There's no foul for acting. *Unless it's in front of a LEO.

Steve

And what if the perp reacts to that move by killing the victim? Still
a smart move?