Nightshade wrote:
Bullshit. You shoot to kill in combat. In a situation like this you apply deadly force as a last resort, and you shoot to disable if you can. Not that that's very likely to happen.
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
Mr.Magnetichead wrote:What else do you suggest they do? They have no power, the have no fuel, they have no water, they have no food, they've been on duty for 3 days, they have no communications, they have no prisons.
I never said they should do something else. I just refuse to act like this is normal and should be considered for other cities.
Nightshade wrote:
Bullshit. You shoot to kill in combat. In a situation like this you apply deadly force as a last resort, and you shoot to disable if you can. Not that that's very likely to happen.
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
duffman91 wrote:This is such a retarded thread. If the UK was submerged under water for half a day, I'm sure you wouldn't be joyfully drinking a cup of tea Foo.
was just sort of thinking that, but also trying to think of comparable situations and i'm coming up blank. did they have this level of societal collapse anywhere following that tsunami?
It's only happening in New Orleans, after the tsunami the water receded and things got back to normal with clean up.
Everyone seems to forget, all the other towns devastated by Katrina, Mississippi, Alabama, South Florida.. over 90,000 square miles of devestation and this is just one town that unfortunately, the dominoes fell and the levy broke and the water isn't receeding, and people aren't getting saved..
It doesn't give the average citizen the right to rape/rob/pillage and kill.
Nightshade wrote:
Bullshit. You shoot to kill in combat. In a situation like this you apply deadly force as a last resort, and you shoot to disable if you can. Not that that's very likely to happen.
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
Nightshade wrote:
Bullshit. You shoot to kill in combat. In a situation like this you apply deadly force as a last resort, and you shoot to disable if you can. Not that that's very likely to happen.
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
you shoot to quell the threat, not its life
shoot m in the leg n watch 'm squirm
You may be trying to get me to bite.. so I will.. You can't verify the the shooter intentions if fired upon you fire back with the intent to take out the target. Period, so you take their right to fire back again away. If they can squirm they can shoot, and more likely or not will shoot again, now that you pissed em off by shooting their leg.
Mr.Magnetichead wrote:What else do you suggest they do? They have no power, the have no fuel, they have no water, they have no food, they've been on duty for 3 days, they have no communications, they have no prisons.
I never said they should do something else. I just refuse to act like this is normal and should be considered for other cities.
Nightshade wrote:
Bullshit. You shoot to kill in combat. In a situation like this you apply deadly force as a last resort, and you shoot to disable if you can. Not that that's very likely to happen.
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
Yeah, ok dickweed. You know this because...?
Have cops/police/guards in family and also was in the military. And you? You always aim center mass. If you pull the trigger you pull the trigger with the intent to kill.
Last edited by Dek on Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mr.Magnetichead wrote:What else do you suggest they do? They have no power, the have no fuel, they have no water, they have no food, they've been on duty for 3 days, they have no communications, they have no prisons.
I never said they should do something else. I just refuse to act like this is normal and should be considered for other cities.
That's the whole point, this is NOT a normal situation. It's fucking chaos.
Now, Dekard may be a complete idiot, but he's right that if people are shooting at you, you shoot back.
Dek wrote:
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
you shoot to quell the threat, not its life
shoot m in the leg n watch 'm squirm
You may be trying to get me to bite.. so I will.. You can't verify the the shooter intentions if fired upon you fire back with the intent to take out the target. Period, so you take their right to fire back again away. If they can squirm they can shoot, and more likely or not will shoot again, now that you pissed em off by shooting their leg.
too bad life's not a game and criminals dont have "end-bosses", eh?
Nightshade wrote:
That's the whole point, this is NOT a normal situation. It's fucking chaos.
Now, Dekard may be a complete idiot, but he's right that if people are shooting at you, you shoot back.
Dek wrote:
Bullshit. If you are shot upon, you shoot to kill. If someone is shooting at you it is combat moron.
Yeah, ok dickweed. You know this because...?
Have cops/police/guards in family and also was in the military. And you? You always aim center mass. If you pull the trigger you pull the trigger with the intent to kill.
Gee, I was only a sergeant in the Marines, where I was an Expert marksman. Let me clarify: If someone is shooting at you, your intent must be to disable IF YOU CAN. Quelling civil disturbances IS NOT combat, I don't care how you try to argue it. Even in war, the goal is not to destroy your enemy, it's to destroy his ability to fight.
Now, that usually means killing them, but ideally it's to destroy his equipment.
If someone is shooting at me, I'm going to be more concerned with hitting him than making sure I hit him in the shoulder. But you need to understand that your INTENT is not supposed to be to kill. Using deadly force and intending to kill someone are not the same thing.
Nightshade wrote:
That's the whole point, this is NOT a normal situation. It's fucking chaos.
Now, Dekard may be a complete idiot, but he's right that if people are shooting at you, you shoot back.
Please point out where I disagreed with that.
Uhh, right here?
SplishSplash wrote:I just refuse to act like this is normal and should be considered for other cities.
agreed... you aim center mass to make sure you hit the target. You don't however aim at his leg, since you most likely may miss. You aim center mass to inflict maximum advantage of hitting the target.
Just like shooting a bottle. You don't aim at the top of the bottle where it's skinny you aim at the center so you'll have a better chance at hitting it. That's all I was suggesting.
And regards to intent to kill; you only pull the trigger if you are ok with taking that persons life. That's the point, you don't pull the trigger thinking, I'm only going to give him a flesh wound. You pull the trigger hoping for the best but fully accepting that you may take this persons life.
Last edited by Dek on Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
