PDA

View Full Version : Re: dunphy's latest


Keith Hobman
November 20th 04, 04:39 AM
In article . net>,
"PostHoc" > wrote:

> from national review...

[snip excellent discourse]

Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
to wound?"

Sheeeiiiiitttt.

Randy Shrader
November 20th 04, 04:57 AM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>
>> from national review...
>
> [snip excellent discourse]
>
> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
> to wound?"
>
> Sheeeiiiiitttt.

Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.

Randy

Keith Hobman
November 20th 04, 05:20 AM
In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
> wrote:

> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article . net>,
> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >
> >> from national review...
> >
> > [snip excellent discourse]
> >
> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
> > to wound?"
> >
> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>
> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.

If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at the
perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)

Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking out
tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I just
hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.

Decorum
November 20th 04, 06:14 AM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
> > wrote:
>
>> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article . net>,
>> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> from national review...
>> >
>> > [snip excellent discourse]
>> >
>> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>> > can't
>> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
>> > aim
>> > to wound?"
>> >
>> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>>
>> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
>
> If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
> man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at the
> perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
> old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)
>
> Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
> andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
> different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking out
> tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I just
> hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.

one thing i can say with complete certainty is that being in an actual
shooting, and a day at the range are about as different as squatting 200
kilos, and watching some guy on tv do it

this dunphy guy writes pretty good articles. they have a whole archive at
www.nationalreview.com . i get the impression his POV is not too popular
with the cop-o-crats at LAPD admin

whit

Decorum
November 20th 04, 06:16 AM
"Randy Shrader" > wrote in message
news:%[email protected]
>
> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article . net>,
>> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>>
>>> from national review...
>>
>> [snip excellent discourse]
>>
>> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
>> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
>> aim
>> to wound?"
>>
>> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>
> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
>
> Randy

technically speaking, police officers are taught to "shoot to stop".
neither to wound or kill, but to stop.

center mass is generally preferred (for a # of reasons) but there is often
reason to shift target (like from center of mass to head), because center of
mass isn't working. and then later on it is found out guy had body armor on

the fact that shooting to stop often results in shooting to kill is
certainly true, but officers are taught to say they "shoot to stop"

whit

>

Decorum
November 20th 04, 06:19 AM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>,
> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>
>> from national review...
>
> [snip excellent discourse]
>
> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
> to wound?"
>
> Sheeeiiiiitttt.

it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
expect.

i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't want
to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.

and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
phenom...

nekkid people are especially slippery.

although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
methinx

whit

John M. Williams
November 20th 04, 06:45 AM
"Decorum" > wrote:
>"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
>> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>>
>>> from national review...
>>
>> [snip excellent discourse]
>>
>> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
>> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
>> to wound?"
>>
>> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>
>it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>expect.
>
>i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't want
>to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>
>and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>phenom...
>
>nekkid people are especially slippery.
>
>although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>methinx

Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
rage may need to be cycled three or four times. And with them, you're
probably gonna need the spit shield, too.

Proton Soup
November 20th 04, 04:24 PM
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:19:54 -0800, "Decorum" >
wrote:

>
>"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
>> In article . net>,
>> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>>
>>> from national review...
>>
>> [snip excellent discourse]
>>
>> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
>> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
>> to wound?"
>>
>> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>
>it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>expect.
>
>i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't want
>to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>
>and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>phenom...
>
>nekkid people are especially slippery.
>
>although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>methinx

There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
Hilarity ensues.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

PostHoc
November 21st 04, 09:47 PM
John M. Williams > wrote in message
...
> "Decorum" > wrote:
> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >>
> >>> from national review...
> >>
> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >>
> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
can't
> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
aim
> >> to wound?"
> >>
> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >
> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
> >expect.
> >
> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
want
> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >
> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
> >phenom...
> >
> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >
> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
> >methinx
>
> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.

which is quite a spectacle.

tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before are very
reticent to get tased again.

mebbe one day i'll actually GET a taser. :l

whit

And with them, you're
> probably gonna need the spit shield, too.

PostHoc
November 21st 04, 09:49 PM
Proton Soup > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:19:54 -0800, "Decorum" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article . net>,
> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >>
> >>> from national review...
> >>
> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >>
> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
can't
> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
aim
> >> to wound?"
> >>
> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >
> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
> >expect.
> >
> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
want
> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >
> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
> >phenom...
> >
> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >
> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
> >methinx
>
> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
> Hilarity ensues.
>

is that the one in philadelphia?

they are in some first floor storefront or something.

nekkid people also render judo pretty ineffective. it's hard to do judo
throws w.o a gi to hold on to. people have discovered this in the UFC.
without Gi's, a lot of classic judo moves, and jiu jitsu moves (classic jiu
jitsu is practiced with a gi) don't work

whit

> -----------
> Proton Soup
>
> "Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

David Cohen
November 21st 04, 10:12 PM
"PostHoc" > wrote
> Proton Soup > wrote
>> "Decorum" > wrote:
>> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote
>> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >>> from national review...
>> >>
>> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
>> >> in
>> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
> can't
>> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
> aim
>> >> to wound?"
>> >>
>> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >
>> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>> >expect.
>> >
>> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
> want
>> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>> >
>> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>> >phenom...
>> >
>> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>> >
>> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>> >methinx
>>
>> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
>> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
>> Hilarity ensues.
>>
> is that the one in philadelphia?
>
> they are in some first floor storefront or something.
>
> nekkid people also render judo pretty ineffective. it's hard to do judo
> throws w.o a gi to hold on to. people have discovered this in the UFC.
> without Gi's, a lot of classic judo moves, and jiu jitsu moves (classic
> jiu
> jitsu is practiced with a gi) don't work

Men have at least one handle, women at least two, (plus hair if available),
so, what's your problem?

David

PostHoc
November 21st 04, 11:00 PM
David Cohen > wrote in message
.net...
>
> "PostHoc" > wrote
> > Proton Soup > wrote
> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote
> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >> >>> from national review...
> >> >>
> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
> >> >> in
> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
> > can't
> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
you
> > aim
> >> >> to wound?"
> >> >>
> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >> >
> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute
a
> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
people
> >> >expect.
> >> >
> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
> > want
> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >> >
> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
> >> >phenom...
> >> >
> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >> >
> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
common
> >> >methinx
> >>
> >> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
> >> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
> >> Hilarity ensues.
> >>
> > is that the one in philadelphia?
> >
> > they are in some first floor storefront or something.
> >
> > nekkid people also render judo pretty ineffective. it's hard to do judo
> > throws w.o a gi to hold on to. people have discovered this in the UFC.
> > without Gi's, a lot of classic judo moves, and jiu jitsu moves (classic
> > jiu
> > jitsu is practiced with a gi) don't work
>
> Men have at least one handle, women at least two, (plus hair if
available),
> so, what's your problem?
>
> David

because if one were to grab man's handle for "purchase" in a fight, the
NAACP would file suit based on disparate impact theory, since it's well
known that certain groupings of people have a bigger handle than others.
this would result in less effectiveness against irish and asian people as
well. :)

whit

>
>
>

Proton Soup
November 21st 04, 11:17 PM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:49:06 GMT, "PostHoc" >
wrote:

>
>Proton Soup > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:19:54 -0800, "Decorum" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> In article . net>,
>> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> from national review...
>> >>
>> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>can't
>> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
>aim
>> >> to wound?"
>> >>
>> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >
>> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>> >expect.
>> >
>> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
>want
>> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>> >
>> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>> >phenom...
>> >
>> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>> >
>> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>> >methinx
>>
>> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
>> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
>> Hilarity ensues.
>>
>
>is that the one in philadelphia?
>
>they are in some first floor storefront or something.

I don't remember the city, but yeah, that sounds about right.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

Proton Soup
November 21st 04, 11:19 PM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:12:16 GMT, "David Cohen"
> wrote:

>
>"PostHoc" > wrote
>> Proton Soup > wrote
>>> "Decorum" > wrote:
>>> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote
>>> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>>> >>> from national review...
>>> >>
>>> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
>>> >> in
>>> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>> can't
>>> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>>> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
>> aim
>>> >> to wound?"
>>> >>
>>> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>>> >
>>> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>>> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>>> >expect.
>>> >
>>> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
>> want
>>> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>>> >
>>> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>>> >phenom...
>>> >
>>> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>>> >
>>> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>>> >methinx
>>>
>>> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
>>> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
>>> Hilarity ensues.
>>>
>> is that the one in philadelphia?
>>
>> they are in some first floor storefront or something.
>>
>> nekkid people also render judo pretty ineffective. it's hard to do judo
>> throws w.o a gi to hold on to. people have discovered this in the UFC.
>> without Gi's, a lot of classic judo moves, and jiu jitsu moves (classic
>> jiu
>> jitsu is practiced with a gi) don't work
>
>Men have at least one handle, women at least two, (plus hair if available),
>so, what's your problem?

If you've got a decent grip, you can pick her up like a bowling ball.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

David Cohen
November 21st 04, 11:47 PM
"PostHoc" > wrote
> David Cohen > wrote
>> "PostHoc" > wrote
>> > Proton Soup > wrote
>> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
>> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote
>> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >> >>> from national review...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of
>> >> >> reason
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>> > can't
>> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
> you
>> > aim
>> >> >> to wound?"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >> >
>> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute
> a
>> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
> people
>> >> >expect.
>> >> >
>> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
>> > want
>> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>> >> >
>> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>> >> >phenom...
>> >> >
>> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>> >> >
>> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
> common
>> >> >methinx
>> >>
>> >> There's a classic scene from the show "Cops" where they're trying to
>> >> apprehend a huge naked guy that's apparently not exactly sober.
>> >> Hilarity ensues.
>> >>
>> > is that the one in philadelphia?
>> >
>> > they are in some first floor storefront or something.
>> >
>> > nekkid people also render judo pretty ineffective. it's hard to do
>> > judo
>> > throws w.o a gi to hold on to. people have discovered this in the UFC.
>> > without Gi's, a lot of classic judo moves, and jiu jitsu moves (classic
>> > jiu
>> > jitsu is practiced with a gi) don't work
>>
>> Men have at least one handle, women at least two, (plus hair if
> available),
>> so, what's your problem?
>
> because if one were to grab man's handle for "purchase" in a fight, the
> NAACP would file suit based on disparate impact theory, since it's well
> known that certain groupings of people have a bigger handle than others.

That's funny on a basic humor level, and also because it's essentially
true...both the size part and the lawsuit part.

> this would result in less effectiveness against irish and asian people as
> well. :)

And wrestling Asians and Irish is such a significant law enforcement
problem.

David

John M. Williams
November 22nd 04, 12:13 AM
"PostHoc" > wrote:
>
>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th circuit?
>
>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst. because
>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>
>i **** you not

Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 12:27 AM
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:20:51 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
> wrote:
>
>> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article . net>,
>> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> from national review...
>> >
>> > [snip excellent discourse]
>> >
>> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
>> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you aim
>> > to wound?"
>> >
>> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>>
>> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
>
>If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
>man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at the
>perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
>old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)

When I took my carry class, the instructor said that cops miss eighty
something % of all shots taken during a shooting and they do better
than the general population. That's probably why so many bystanders
get shot in gang shootings.

>
>Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
>andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
>different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking out
>tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I just
>hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.

Did he hunt? I've noticed that the more I hunt and the farther into
the hunting season it gets, the less adrenaline is coursing through my
veins when shooting game. After 3 days of hunting ducks and
pheasants, we went squirrel and rabbit hunting late this morning.
Buddy scared up a rabbit and I shot it instinctively while my pulse
rate hardly rose.

Speaking of duck hunting, are there any ducks left up in Canada? We
haven't seen the huge migrations this year and we only seen 3 ducks
all this morning. Yesterday, we had a lot of action but not like you
would when there is a big freeze to the north. The temps dropped off
last night and all the ponds were frozen over this morning and we
heard some ducks cruising south last night. I'm assuming those that
left last night were local or at least had been in country for a
while.

PostHoc
November 22nd 04, 12:57 AM
John M. Williams > wrote in message
...
> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >
> >have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
circuit?
> >
> >the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
because
> >they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
> >
> >i **** you not
>
> Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.

which, interestingly, was initially promoted to a large extent BY blacks,
complaining of rampant crime associated with crack cocaine dealing. see:
are cops racist by heather mcdonald of city journal.

it is true that blacks disproportionately are users and dealers of crack vs.
powder cocaine. what is rarely admitted by disparate impact theorists is
that blacks face a significantly disparate amount of violence AGAINST them
by crack dealers and users. their homicide, assault, and robbery
victimization rates are WAY higher than whites. they are/were the victims
of the crack scourge and they, to a large extent WANTED higher penalties.

also noted, that there are a disproportionate # of E/R visits by crack users
vs. powder cocaine users.

not that this is surprising. make a drug more addictive, more potent, and
more psychoactive and what do you expect?

whit

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 01:44 AM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:13:59 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>
>>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th circuit?
>>
>>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst. because
>>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>
>>i **** you not
>
>Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.

So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.

PostHoc
November 22nd 04, 01:47 AM
John Hanson > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:13:59 -0500, John M. Williams
> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>
> >"PostHoc" > wrote:
> >>
> >>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
circuit?
> >>
> >>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
because
> >>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
> >>
> >>i **** you not
> >
> >Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>
> So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
> be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.

you need to distinguish CRACK cocaine, from powder cocaine (hydrochloride)

in my jurisdiction, penalty for meth is higher than for crack

whit

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 01:54 AM
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:47:33 GMT, "PostHoc" >
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>John Hanson > wrote in message
...
>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:13:59 -0500, John M. Williams
>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >"PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
>circuit?
>> >>
>> >>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
>because
>> >>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>> >>
>> >>i **** you not
>> >
>> >Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>
>> So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>> be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>
>you need to distinguish CRACK cocaine, from powder cocaine (hydrochloride)
>
>in my jurisdiction, penalty for meth is higher than for crack
>
We were talking about the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing which
assumes you are comparing it to powdered coke. Anywho, looks like
sentencing guidelines are commensurate with the destructiveness of the
drugs.

Keith Hobman
November 22nd 04, 02:28 AM
In article >, John Hanson
> wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:20:51 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>
> >In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article . net>,
> >> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> from national review...
> >> >
> >> > [snip excellent discourse]
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
> >> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
> >> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
you aim
> >> > to wound?"
> >> >
> >> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >>
> >> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
> >
> >If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
> >man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at the
> >perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
> >old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)
>
> When I took my carry class, the instructor said that cops miss eighty
> something % of all shots taken during a shooting and they do better
> than the general population. That's probably why so many bystanders
> get shot in gang shootings.
>
> >
> >Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
> >andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
> >different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking out
> >tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I just
> >hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.
>
> Did he hunt? I've noticed that the more I hunt and the farther into
> the hunting season it gets, the less adrenaline is coursing through my
> veins when shooting game. After 3 days of hunting ducks and
> pheasants, we went squirrel and rabbit hunting late this morning.
> Buddy scared up a rabbit and I shot it instinctively while my pulse
> rate hardly rose.

Yeah, although mostly deer. Quite a bit different tho - the game isn't
shooting back.
>
> Speaking of duck hunting, are there any ducks left up in Canada? We
> haven't seen the huge migrations this year and we only seen 3 ducks
> all this morning. Yesterday, we had a lot of action but not like you
> would when there is a big freeze to the north. The temps dropped off
> last night and all the ponds were frozen over this morning and we
> heard some ducks cruising south last night. I'm assuming those that
> left last night were local or at least had been in country for a
> while.

We still seem to have a lot of geese and duck up here. It has been fairly mild.

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 02:54 AM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:28:33 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>In article >, John Hanson
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:20:51 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
>> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article . net>,
>> >> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> from national review...
>> >> >
>> >> > [snip excellent discourse]
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> >> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they can't
>> >> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
>you aim
>> >> > to wound?"
>> >> >
>> >> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >>
>> >> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
>> >
>> >If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
>> >man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at the
>> >perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
>> >old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)
>>
>> When I took my carry class, the instructor said that cops miss eighty
>> something % of all shots taken during a shooting and they do better
>> than the general population. That's probably why so many bystanders
>> get shot in gang shootings.
>>
>> >
>> >Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
>> >andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
>> >different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking out
>> >tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I just
>> >hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.
>>
>> Did he hunt? I've noticed that the more I hunt and the farther into
>> the hunting season it gets, the less adrenaline is coursing through my
>> veins when shooting game. After 3 days of hunting ducks and
>> pheasants, we went squirrel and rabbit hunting late this morning.
>> Buddy scared up a rabbit and I shot it instinctively while my pulse
>> rate hardly rose.
>
>Yeah, although mostly deer. Quite a bit different tho - the game isn't
>shooting back.

True but you get the same adrenaline rush. Deer hunters have had
their heartbeats monitored at over 160 bpm when seeing deer. That is
also, as I'm sure you know, what the term buck fever comes from.

>>
>> Speaking of duck hunting, are there any ducks left up in Canada? We
>> haven't seen the huge migrations this year and we only seen 3 ducks
>> all this morning. Yesterday, we had a lot of action but not like you
>> would when there is a big freeze to the north. The temps dropped off
>> last night and all the ponds were frozen over this morning and we
>> heard some ducks cruising south last night. I'm assuming those that
>> left last night were local or at least had been in country for a
>> while.
>
>We still seem to have a lot of geese and duck up here. It has been fairly mild.

That's what I figured. We still have some in the southeastern part of
the state but not out west where I was hunting (about 40 miles due
east of the ND/SD border).

Decorum
November 22nd 04, 05:12 AM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, John Hanson
> > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:20:51 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
>> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >In article <%[email protected]>, "Randy Shrader"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article . net>,
>> >> > "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> from national review...
>> >> >
>> >> > [snip excellent discourse]
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
>> >> > in
>> >> > there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>> >> > can't
>> >> > possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> > policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
> you aim
>> >> > to wound?"
>> >> >
>> >> > Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >>
>> >> Say you did aim to wound. Mortally.
>> >
>> >If a cop pulls his gun he is normally under considerable duress. My old
>> >man used to say he would probably be better off throwing the thing at
>> >the
>> >perp - better chance of hitting him. (This was when they used to use the
>> >old .38 - even if you did hit the round might just bounce off.)
>>
>> When I took my carry class, the instructor said that cops miss eighty
>> something % of all shots taken during a shooting and they do better
>> than the general population. That's probably why so many bystanders
>> get shot in gang shootings.
>>
>> >
>> >Dad was a good marksmen too. Shooting at the range and shooting when
>> >andrenaline is pumping so hard your eyeballs are bobbling are two
>> >different things. Dad was good with the sniper gun and good at taking
>> >out
>> >tires. But when someone decides to pull a gun and point it his way I
>> >just
>> >hoped he hit the asshole and hit him hard.
>>
>> Did he hunt? I've noticed that the more I hunt and the farther into
>> the hunting season it gets, the less adrenaline is coursing through my
>> veins when shooting game. After 3 days of hunting ducks and
>> pheasants, we went squirrel and rabbit hunting late this morning.
>> Buddy scared up a rabbit and I shot it instinctively while my pulse
>> rate hardly rose.
>
> Yeah, although mostly deer. Quite a bit different tho - the game isn't
> shooting back.

IT'S COMING RIGHT AT US!!!

whit

>>
>> Speaking of duck hunting, are there any ducks left up in Canada? We
>> haven't seen the huge migrations this year and we only seen 3 ducks
>> all this morning. Yesterday, we had a lot of action but not like you
>> would when there is a big freeze to the north. The temps dropped off
>> last night and all the ponds were frozen over this morning and we
>> heard some ducks cruising south last night. I'm assuming those that
>> left last night were local or at least had been in country for a
>> while.
>
> We still seem to have a lot of geese and duck up here. It has been fairly
> mild.

Decorum
November 22nd 04, 05:13 AM
"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:47:33 GMT, "PostHoc" >
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>
>>
>>John Hanson > wrote in message
...
>>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:13:59 -0500, John M. Williams
>>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>>
>>> >"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
>>circuit?
>>> >>
>>> >>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
>>because
>>> >>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>> >>
>>> >>i **** you not
>>> >
>>> >Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>>
>>> So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>>> be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>>
>>you need to distinguish CRACK cocaine, from powder cocaine (hydrochloride)
>>
>>in my jurisdiction, penalty for meth is higher than for crack
>>
> We were talking about the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing which
> assumes you are comparing it to powdered coke. Anywho, looks like
> sentencing guidelines are commensurate with the destructiveness of the
> drugs.

in general, yes.

we have a point system in this state,and iirc meth and oxycontins are up
near the top

otoh, scheduling is wack. don't forget the feds put marijuana in schedule
I. which is ludicrous on its face

whit

John M. Williams
November 22nd 04, 05:24 AM
John Hanson > wrote:

> John M. Williams > wrote:
>
>>"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>>
>>>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th circuit?
>>>
>>>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst. because
>>>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>>
>>>i **** you not
>>
>>Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>
>So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.

Gram for gram, no. But state legislatures are really getting
aggressive with the home meth labs. It's now a first-degree felony in
Ohio if you cook meth with a child in the house.

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 05:28 AM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:13:56 -0800, "Decorum" >
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:47:33 GMT, "PostHoc" >
>> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>>>
>>>John Hanson > wrote in message
...
>>>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:13:59 -0500, John M. Williams
>>>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>>>
>>>> >"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
>>>circuit?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
>>>because
>>>> >>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>i **** you not
>>>> >
>>>> >Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>>>
>>>> So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>>>> be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>>>
>>>you need to distinguish CRACK cocaine, from powder cocaine (hydrochloride)
>>>
>>>in my jurisdiction, penalty for meth is higher than for crack
>>>
>> We were talking about the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing which
>> assumes you are comparing it to powdered coke. Anywho, looks like
>> sentencing guidelines are commensurate with the destructiveness of the
>> drugs.
>
>in general, yes.
>
>we have a point system in this state,and iirc meth and oxycontins are up
>near the top
>
>otoh, scheduling is wack. don't forget the feds put marijuana in schedule
>I. which is ludicrous on its face
>
I won't argue with you there. I actually believe most drugs should be
decriminalized or just regulated in the way alcohol is...like
marijuana.

John Hanson
November 22nd 04, 05:32 AM
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:24:21 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>John Hanson > wrote:
>
>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>
>>>"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th circuit?
>>>>
>>>>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst. because
>>>>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>>>
>>>>i **** you not
>>>
>>>Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>
>>So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>>be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>
>Gram for gram, no. But state legislatures are really getting
>aggressive with the home meth labs. It's now a first-degree felony in
>Ohio if you cook meth with a child in the house.

Good. It's also destroying homes which is ****ing off the banks
because the houses used for the labs are so contaminated, some need to
be razed and that doesn't sit well with the mortgage companies.

John M. Williams
November 22nd 04, 05:54 AM
John Hanson > wrote:

> John M. Williams > wrote:
>
>>John Hanson > wrote:
>>
>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>
>>>>"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th circuit?
>>>>>
>>>>>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst. because
>>>>>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>>>>
>>>>>i **** you not
>>>>
>>>>Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>>
>>>So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>>>be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>>
>>Gram for gram, no. But state legislatures are really getting
>>aggressive with the home meth labs. It's now a first-degree felony in
>>Ohio if you cook meth with a child in the house.
>
>Good. It's also destroying homes which is ****ing off the banks
>because the houses used for the labs are so contaminated, some need to
>be razed and that doesn't sit well with the mortgage companies.

EPA regulations. That's why we aren't always interested in the
forfeiture of offender-owned homes used for meth labs, particularly if
they have been burying lab waste in the yard. Cleanup costs are more
than it's worth.

David Cohen
November 22nd 04, 05:59 AM
"John M. Williams" > wrote
> John Hanson > wrote:
>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>"PostHoc" > wrote:
>>>>have you seen the latest disparate impact lawsuit UPHELD by the 9th
>>>>circuit?
>>>>
>>>>the claim is that laws that prohibit felons from voting are unconst.
>>>>because
>>>>they disparately impact certain racial minorities.
>>>>
>>>>i **** you not
>>>
>>>Just another extension of the higher-penalty-for-crack-cocaine thing.
>>
>>So how does the penalty for meth compare to coke? I think it should
>>be the same as for crack and if it isn't, I'm betting it will be soon.
>
> Gram for gram, no. But state legislatures are really getting
> aggressive with the home meth labs. It's now a first-degree felony in
> Ohio if you cook meth with a child in the house.

I would think the child would ruin the mix even more than guaifenisen.

David

Lucas Buck
November 22nd 04, 06:37 AM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:27:27 -0600, John Hanson >
wrote:

>Speaking of duck hunting, are there any ducks left up in Canada? We
>haven't seen the huge migrations this year and we only seen 3 ducks
>all this morning. Yesterday, we had a lot of action but not like you
>would when there is a big freeze to the north.

They've had trouble getting airspace permission this year to due backlogs in
Homeland Security.

Lucas Buck
November 26th 04, 10:24 AM
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" > wrote:

>
>John M. Williams > wrote in message
...
>> "Decorum" > wrote:
>> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
>> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> from national review...
>> >>
>> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason in
>> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>can't
>> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't you
>aim
>> >> to wound?"
>> >>
>> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >
>> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute a
>> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which people
>> >expect.
>> >
>> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
>want
>> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>> >
>> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>> >phenom...
>> >
>> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>> >
>> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less common
>> >methinx
>>
>> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
>> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
>> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
>> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
>> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
>
>which is quite a spectacle.
>
>tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before are very
>reticent to get tased again.

Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.

Esca
November 26th 04, 03:41 PM
"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" > wrote:
>
> >
> >John M. Williams > wrote in message
> ...
> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> from national review...
> >> >>
> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
in
> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
> >can't
> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
you
> >aim
> >> >> to wound?"
> >> >>
> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >> >
> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute
a
> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
people
> >> >expect.
> >> >
> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
> >want
> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >> >
> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
> >> >phenom...
> >> >
> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >> >
> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
common
> >> >methinx
> >>
> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
> >
> >which is quite a spectacle.
> >
> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before are
very
> >reticent to get tased again.
>
> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
>

yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king

whit

Lucas Buck
November 26th 04, 10:40 PM
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:41:29 -0800, "Esca" > wrote:

>
>"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >John M. Williams > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
>> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
>> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> from national review...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
>in
>> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
>> >can't
>> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
>> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
>you
>> >aim
>> >> >> to wound?"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
>> >> >
>> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute
>a
>> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
>people
>> >> >expect.
>> >> >
>> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
>> >want
>> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
>> >> >
>> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
>> >> >phenom...
>> >> >
>> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
>> >> >
>> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
>common
>> >> >methinx
>> >>
>> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
>> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
>> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
>> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
>> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
>> >
>> >which is quite a spectacle.
>> >
>> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before are
>very
>> >reticent to get tased again.
>>
>> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
>>
>
>yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king
>
>whit


The newest (highest-powered) models have had over a half-dozen subsequent
deaths in 2004 alone. The other extreme has its problems as well.

PostHoc
November 26th 04, 11:35 PM
Lucas Buck > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:41:29 -0800, "Esca" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" >
wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >John M. Williams > wrote in
message
> >> ...
> >> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> >> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> >> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> from national review...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of
reason
> >in
> >> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations
they
> >> >can't
> >> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why
didn't
> >you
> >> >aim
> >> >> >> to wound?"
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot
execute
> >a
> >> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
> >people
> >> >> >expect.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY
don't
> >> >want
> >> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest
UFC
> >> >> >phenom...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
> >common
> >> >> >methinx
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
> >> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
> >> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
> >> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind
drunken
> >> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
> >> >
> >> >which is quite a spectacle.
> >> >
> >> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before
are
> >very
> >> >reticent to get tased again.
> >>
> >> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
> >>
> >
> >yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king
> >
> >whit
>
>
> The newest (highest-powered) models have had over a half-dozen subsequent
> deaths in 2004 alone. The other extreme has its problems as well.
>
>

oh please. it's called LESS lethal, not NON lethal for a reason

considering the # of taser applications (assuming that your #'s are even
true and *directly* attributable to tasing, that is still a phenomenally
small #)

it's like when some idjit gets a heart attack and dies, after handcuffing.
it MUST be the handcuffs that "caused" the death.

the handcuffing didn't CAUSE his death. the 2 grams of coke he snorted, the
heart condition, and the gross obesity might have SOMETHING to do with it.
:l

otoh, tasing somebody after using a version of pepper spray that has a
flammable vehicle to suspend it in can result in an interesting incendiary
effect


whit

Will Brink
November 27th 04, 08:38 PM
In article >,
Lucas Buck > wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:41:29 -0800, "Esca" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >John M. Williams > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> >> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> >> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> from national review...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of reason
> >in
> >> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations they
> >> >can't
> >> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> >> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why didn't
> >you
> >> >aim
> >> >> >> to wound?"
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot execute
> >a
> >> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
> >people
> >> >> >expect.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY don't
> >> >want
> >> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest UFC
> >> >> >phenom...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
> >common
> >> >> >methinx
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
> >> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
> >> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
> >> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind drunken
> >> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
> >> >
> >> >which is quite a spectacle.
> >> >
> >> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before are
> >very
> >> >reticent to get tased again.
> >>
> >> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
> >>
> >
> >yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king
> >
> >whit
>
>
> The newest (highest-powered) models have had over a half-dozen subsequent
> deaths in 2004 alone. The other extreme has its problems as well.

Perhaps they should have a power setting, not unlike Star Trek. 50,000
volts for small sober people and 100,000 plus for some large drunk biker
type, or something to that effect.

>
>

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Will Brink
November 27th 04, 08:40 PM
In article t>,
"PostHoc" > wrote:

> Lucas Buck > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:41:29 -0800, "Esca" > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" >
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >John M. Williams > wrote in
> message
> > >> ...
> > >> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> > >> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> > >> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>> from national review...
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of
> reason
> > >in
> > >> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations
> they
> > >> >can't
> > >> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar. Every
> > >> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why
> didn't
> > >you
> > >> >aim
> > >> >> >> to wound?"
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot
> execute
> > >a
> > >> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker. which
> > >people
> > >> >> >expect.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY
> don't
> > >> >want
> > >> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the latest
> UFC
> > >> >> >phenom...
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is less
> > >common
> > >> >> >methinx
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult ones.
> > >> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap the
> > >> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away, without
> > >> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind
> drunken
> > >> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
> > >> >
> > >> >which is quite a spectacle.
> > >> >
> > >> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased before
> are
> > >very
> > >> >reticent to get tased again.
> > >>
> > >> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
> > >>
> > >
> > >yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king
> > >
> > >whit
> >
> >
> > The newest (highest-powered) models have had over a half-dozen subsequent
> > deaths in 2004 alone. The other extreme has its problems as well.
> >
> >
>
> oh please. it's called LESS lethal, not NON lethal for a reason

I assume you heard of the paintball that went through the chicks eye and
killed her here in Boston. Nothing is 100% safe and it's better than
being clubbed or shot.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Idie
November 28th 04, 04:22 AM
Will Brink > wrote in message
...
> In article t>,
> "PostHoc" > wrote:
>
> > Lucas Buck > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:41:29 -0800, "Esca" > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:47:21 GMT, "PostHoc" >
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> >John M. Williams > wrote in
> > message
> > > >> ...
> > > >> >> "Decorum" > wrote:
> > > >> >> >"Keith Hobman" > wrote:
> > > >> >> >> "PostHoc" > wrote:
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >>> from national review...
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> [snip excellent discourse]
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> Thanks for posting that Whit. I feel like there is a voice of
> > reason
> > > >in
> > > >> >> >> there. I'm amazed at how people stand judgement on situations
> > they
> > > >> >can't
> > > >> >> >> possibly comprehend without experiencing something similar.
Every
> > > >> >> >> policeman who has shot someone knows what it is about. "Why
> > didn't
> > > >you
> > > >> >aim
> > > >> >> >> to wound?"
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> Sheeeiiiiitttt.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >it's tv-itis. for the same reason that cops (usually) cannot
> > execute
> > > >a
> > > >> >> >perfect takedown and handcuffing technique a la TJ Hooker.
which
> > > >people
> > > >> >> >expect.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >i don't care how big and strong the cop is. when people REALLY
> > don't
> > > >> >want
> > > >> >> >to go to jail, the wrasslin' starts.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >and the cop just hopes the guy he is arresting is not the
latest
> > UFC
> > > >> >> >phenom...
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >nekkid people are especially slippery.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >although with the recent advent of effective tasers, that is
less
> > > >common
> > > >> >> >methinx
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Well, there tends to be short time window for the difficult
ones.
> > > >> >> After the officer is done cycling the Taser, if he doesn't slap
the
> > > >> >> cuffs on immediately, some folks will get wiggly right away,
without
> > > >> >> regard to the nasty experience they just had. Guys in a blind
> > drunken
> > > >> >> rage may need to be cycled three or four times.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >which is quite a spectacle.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >tasers are a phenomenal deterrent. peope who HAVE been tased
before
> > are
> > > >very
> > > >> >reticent to get tased again.
> > > >>
> > > >> Those who survive darts from the current-production models, anyway.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >yeah, the old ones suck. ask rodney king
> > > >
> > > >whit
> > >
> > >
> > > The newest (highest-powered) models have had over a half-dozen
subsequent
> > > deaths in 2004 alone. The other extreme has its problems as well.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > oh please. it's called LESS lethal, not NON lethal for a reason
>
> I assume you heard of the paintball that went through the chicks eye

you could put an eye out with one of those things

and
> killed her here in Boston. Nothing is 100% safe and it's better than
> being clubbed or shot.

exactamundo.

a frigging PUNCH to the chest CAN kill you.

any broken bone can as well.

whit

>
> --
> Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/
>
>