Ferguson Riots

#1,676
#1,676
Has assault on the officer been confirmed yet?

Also what is their definition of close range? Point black? 10 feet? ??
 
Last edited:
#1,677
#1,677
tim said:
Then the good Dr. inserted his personal opinion by saying 6 rounds was excessive. How in hell can he know what is excessive. He's an attention whore who is drumming up business. Also, stippling (the effects of a close range gsw) would not be present on the body had the deceased been shot through an article of clothing (like a hat or shirt). What it does tell us is that A. He was not shot in the back and B. He was not shot while his hands were up. Both were the issues used to fuel this CF.
Click to expand...

Stole that one out straight out of LG's toolbox.
 
#1,678
#1,678
tim said:
Then the good Dr. inserted his personal opinion by saying 6 rounds was excessive. How in hell can he know what is excessive. He's an attention whore who is drumming up business. Also, stippling (the effects of a close range gsw) would not be present on the body had the deceased been shot through an article of clothing (like a hat or shirt). What it does tell us is that A. He was not shot in the back and B. He was not shot while his hands were up. Both were the issues used to fuel this CF.
Click to expand...

Also the final shot would have probably made contact as he was falling which, unless the officer had lightning reflexes, may have not realized the threat was neutralized before that shot went off.
 
#1,682
#1,682
govols/cc said:
Why? Was he aiming for the leg?
Click to expand...

I dont know what his intentions were exactly, but aiming for the arm isn't what they're taught. I can guarantee that much. Knee cap/leg shot would have ended it. He was aiming to kill and 4 shots missed its intended target.

Always aim center mass.
 
#1,684
#1,684
Septic said:
Yeah, Obama should have mentioned all that. That's totally what the black community needs to hear right now.


:birgits_giggle::thumbsup:
Click to expand...


who cares what those particular individuals want to hear and don't want to hear. Maybe that way of thinking is part of the ****ing problem. Who cares what they don't want to hear
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,685
#1,685
7thgroupvolfan said:
I dont know what his intentions were exactly, but aiming for the arm isn't what they're taught. I can guarantee that much. Knee cap/leg shot would have ended it. He was aiming to kill and 4 shots missed its intended target.

Always aim center mass.
Click to expand...

Tim posted this a while back:

tim said:
Devils advocate here, but.... To your question when an officer shoots he is usually coming on to target with a holstered gun. Depending on the situation and the quckness that it happens, it is not uncommon for the first shots to start low, working up to center mass. It is also not uncommon for rounds to strike the perceived threat. In this case, what was striking him, or what was about to strike him, as this is a focal point during an altercation. In other words, if you were coming at me with a knife I wouldnt be looking at center mass initally.
Click to expand...
 
#1,686
#1,686
7thgroupvolfan said:
I dont know what his intentions were exactly, but aiming for the arm isn't what they're taught. I can guarantee that much. Knee cap/leg shot would have ended it. He was aiming to kill and 4 shots missed its intended target.

Always aim center mass.
Click to expand...

You bring up an interesting question....how bad of a shot is he, or how far away was the victim? If he's right on top of him assaulting him, then you'd expect poor accuracy. But there's no gun powder on him. So you have to decide that either he's a terrible shot or that Brown was far enough away that it will be hard to claim a justified shooting.
 
#1,687
#1,687
7thgroupvolfan said:
I dont know what his intentions were exactly, but aiming for the arm isn't what they're taught. I can guarantee that much. Knee cap/leg shot would have ended it. He was aiming to kill and 4 shots missed its intended target.

Always aim center mass.
Click to expand...

I'm sure in the heat of the moment it's just as easy as on the range with a moving target & all. When you shoot it should be to kill.
 
#1,688
#1,688
n_huffhines said:
You bring up an interesting question....how bad of a shot is he, or how far away was the victim? If he's right on top of him assaulting him, then you'd expect poor accuracy. But there's no gun powder on him. So you have to decide that either he's a terrible shot or that Brown was far enough away that it will be hard to claim a justified shooting.
Click to expand...

Brown was a 6'5" 300lbs man. If He's even 35ft away, but coming at you, he's a threat.
 
#1,691
#1,691
n_huffhines said:
You bring up an interesting question....how bad of a shot is he, or how far away was the victim? If he's right on top of him assaulting him, then you'd expect poor accuracy. But there's no gun powder on him. So you have to decide that either he's a terrible shot or that Brown was far enough away that it will be hard to claim a justified shooting.
Click to expand...

Terrible shot? He hit an active target 6 times, within 6 inches of CM, killing him.

This isn't a video game
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,693
#1,693
n_huffhines said:
You bring up an interesting question....how bad of a shot is he, or how far away was the victim? If he's right on top of him assaulting him, then you'd expect poor accuracy. But there's no gun powder on him. So you have to decide that either he's a terrible shot or that Brown was far enough away that it will be hard to claim a justified shooting.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that he didnt intentionality shoot the man in the arm 4 times. What the hell good is that?
 
#1,700
#1,700
7thgroupvolfan said:
When you're using a hand gun your target is blurry with your front site post in focus. You are looking at what's in his hands initially to access your threat and situation.
Click to expand...

In a close quarter battle the current shooting tactic is "point shoot". I doubt he brought his front sight into focus. Regarding gunpowder a typical handgun round has very little opposed to a shotgun and there are measurements available for typical distance from muzzle. Also, GSR tests are deemed unreliable and iirc not allowed in courts. Im not talking about distance I'm talking about the actual test used to show if someone fired a weapon.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top