Random Thought Thread

Kulainn said:
Oh, I never said it was some sort of gold standard, just personal opinion given the variables of the scenario (ie. walls, target acquisition in the dark etc).
Click to expand...
When I first was issued an 870 back in the early 80's, we were issued #4, 00, and slugs. Not long thereafter the #4 was removed from issuance. (I still have some vintage #4 in the basement.)

I'm not saying it can't be effective, but I'm not loading my 870 with it for home defense. To each his own...and I respect anyone willing to defend their home from the barbarian horde.
 
I have a concealed carry permit & when I carry, my gun is loaded w/the most lethal ammo available because, if I'm going to use deadly force, I'm going to make sure my target does not live to testify against me.

I'll have enough problems in that event & don't need a sympathetic "victim" around to add to the mess. 🤷‍♂️

I also have a PORAC legal defense policy to cover me in that event.
 
Last edited:
sgt1372 said:
I have a concealed carry permit & when I carry, my gun is loaded w/the most lethal ammo available because, if I'm going deadly force, I'm going to make sure my target does not live to testify against me.

I'll have enough problems in that event & don't need a sympathetic "victim" around to add to the mess. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
As an alleged retired LEO, (I know you worked corrections), that is a foolish thing to post online. If you remove yours, I'll remove mine.
 
Blues said:
As an alleged retired LEO, (I know you worked corrections), that is a foolish thing to post online. If you remove yours, I'll remove mine.
Click to expand...

I am a retired LEO & I'm not worried about it.

I would never use deadly force unless I considered the use legally defensible.

If I am justified in using deadly force, the type of ammo I use won't matter.

I'm also I'm not afraid to say that, if I'm going to use deadly force, that I'm going to shoot to kill. That's how we were trained in the Academy.

Center mass shots only; no silly arm/leg shots. We were also trained to execute double taps w/a 3rd head shot in close quartrers.

The only question is whether I am legally justified in using deadly force or not.

Note that I'm not only a retired LEO but also a retired attorney.

So, I know the law & I know that, even if you're justified in the use of deadly force in killing someone, you risk EVERYTHING doing it

So, it's not something that I'd do unless absolutely necessary.

PS: So that you (nor anyone else) thinks it's just "alleged," I'll be happy to show you or anyone else that I meet in person, my Star & ID & my Bar Cards which I always carry on me.

I'm in inactive status as a lawyer in 2 jurisdictions but reactivating them is really easy.
 
Last edited:
sgt1372 said:
I am a retired LEO & I'm not worried about it.

I would never use deadly force unless I considered the use legally defensible.

If I am justified in using deadly force, the type of ammo I use won't matter.

I'm also I'm not afraid to say that, if I'm going to use deadly force, that I'm going to shoot to kill. That's how we were trained in the Academy.

Center mass shots only; no silly arm/leg shots. We were also trained to execute double taps w/a 3rd head shot in close quartrers.

The only question is whether I was justified using deadly force or not.

Note that I'm not only a retired LEO but also a retired attorney.

So, I know the law & I know that, even if you're justified in the use of deadly force in killing someone, you risk EVERYTHING doing it

So, it's not something that I'd do unless absolutely necessary.
Click to expand...
I know you're a little older than I am, and my first academy was in the early 80's, but that was not the language at the time.

(Please feel free to show me the current standard one is held to, and whether or not an officer or agent is trained to only use sufficient force, (including shooting), in order to stop the perpetrator from continuing the action which forced the officer or agent to use his or her firearm in the first place. No more, no less.)

Secondly, being an attorney does not in and of itself necessarily indicate knowledge and familiarity with the law. I've locked horns with plenty of attorneys with which to prove my case. (Not saying you are not conversant, but a law degree is not in itself sufficient to claim proficiency.)

In any case, good luck to you. We clearly are of different mindsets and experience as regards what is justified when employing a firearm. If you are comfortable with your position, more power to you.
 
Blues said:
I know you're a little older than I am, and my first academy was in the early 80's, but that was not the language at the time.

(Please feel free to show me the current standard one is held to, and whether or not an officer or agent is trained to only use sufficient force, (including shooting), in order to stop the perpetrator from continuing the action which forced the officer or agent to use his or her firearm in the first place. No more, no less.)

Secondly, being an attorney does not in and of itself necessarily indicate knowledge and familiarity with the law. I've locked horns with plenty of attorneys with which to prove my case. (Not saying you are not conversant, but a law degree is not in itself sufficient to claim proficiency.)

In any case, good luck to you. We clearly are of different mindsets and experience as regards what is justified when employing a firearm. If you are comfortable with your position, more power to you.
Click to expand...

My standard for using deadly force is the legal one & I'm comfortable with.

As for the use of force while on duty, if you are an ex-LEO as your comment suggests, you & I were both trained in the levels of use of force allowed & know that deadly force is the last of them.

As I noted, I personally would only use deadly force when I thought it was legally justified & even then only if absolutely necessary &, since I seldom carry a gun anymore, even though I am licensed to do so, the likelihood of my ever being faced with such a decision is highly unlikely.

As for my knowledge of the law, I graduated near the top of my class at Georgetown & qualified for 1 of the law reviews. I also graduated as Top Gun & at the top of the my class in POST testing, which is all criminal law, in my Academy class.

I can show you the diplomas & certificates for those allegations too. 😉
 
Last edited:
Color me impressed.

I was invited to join Mensa. Doesn't make me smart. (And I didn't join.)

You're welcome to go through the boxes in my garage as well. I've got plenty of paper to keep you busy if you want to measure dicks.

I replied to your post above because I thought you did yourself a disservice. Clearly I was wrong.

Have a nice day now.
 
Blues said:
Color me impressed.

I was invited to join Mensa. Doesn't make me smart. (And I didn't join.)

You're welcome to go through the boxes in my garage as well. I've got plenty of paper to keep you busy if you want to measure dicks.

I replied to your post above because I thought you did yourself a disservice. Clearly I was wrong.

Have a nice day now.I
Click to expand...
I was a member of member of Mensa but dropped out when I didn't find their activity groups interesting.

Don't know where my acceptance letter with but I've still got a copy of their magazine w/my name on it lying around for proof. LOL!

Just joined to see if they'd accept me wc they did based on my LSAT scores

Doesn't mean anything because, as a practicing attorney, I've been in a room with a lot of other smart people & I KNEW that I wasn't the smartest among them. 😉
 
Last edited:
R1Z6STv.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top