You know that shit was funny
The first 10 times… you are now on like the 357th attempt….
You know that shit was funny
The first 10 times… you are now on like the 357th attempt….
The truth is what the truth is... don't matter how many times.
Still hurts eh lil buddy?
At the end of day, the force returned was not reasonable or comparable to the force used on him. The totality of the circumstances did not justify pulling a knife in my opinion, let alone disemboweling one of them.
He still had a duty to remove himself from the situation instead of escalating it. It's not like they prevented him from leaving.
Force returned in a self-defense situation must be equal to or lesser than the force used upon you. A knife is not equal to or less force than being punched.Force is Force. They pushed him into the water and hit him +5 on 1, pushing someone down in water and hitting them is an extremely life threatening situation.
We have several threads here alone about teens ganging up and killing or leaving someone crippled for life after just a few kicks and hits.
They had the same duty by your logic.
Hard to retreat when surrounded and being hit under water.
Force returned in a self-defense situation must be equal to or lesser than the force used upon you. A knife is not equal to or less force than being punched.
He had plenty of instances to retreat. He chose not to. Now he pays the price for his machismo.
Force returned in a self-defense situation must be equal to or lesser than the force used upon you. A knife is not equal to or less force than being punched.
He had plenty of instances to retreat. He chose not to. Now he pays the price for his machismo.
Please cite the law, because that is not true.
So a guy comes at me with a knife I have to knife fight him and leave my pistol holster? No.
Yup and civilians aren’t held to the law enforcement standards when it comes to use of force continuum. Fearing for your life or the lives of others can justify deadly force. I remember a case where several teenagers tried to mug/rob a retired Marine. That marine went to work with a blade and killed several of them. He was no billed, not indicted. I don’t believe they were carrying any guns from what I recall, they just tried to assault and rob him.You can't look at it in the way it's a one on one fist fight where a knife would equate to excessive force. You have to account for the ratio of people involved, and to my knowledge, there is no legal statute that covers deadly force authorization when a person is outnumbered. Ultimately, it comes down and is judged to what a reasonable person would do. I do not think it is entirely unreasonable and the fact there is a hot debate surrounding the incident should be evidence of it being considered reasonable.
Couldn't find my old study guides that laid out the force continuum but I do have my old CQB handbook and there's some great information in the first few pages about violent confrontations and the mental state that everyone should learn and know by heart and use it as a basis to train to, especially the part about the conscious and sub-conscious mind. Muscle memory is how you win battles but it's so much more than that.
The SOP 9 is an eye opener as well.
View attachment 1837406View attachment 1837407View attachment 1837408View attachment 1837409View attachment 1837410View attachment 1837411View attachment 1837412
Very interesting and cool. Thanks for posting.
Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
Yup and civilians aren’t held to the law enforcement standards when it comes to use of force continuum. Fearing for your life or the lives of others can justify deadly force. I remember a case where several teenagers tried to mug/rob a retired Marine. That marine went to work with a blade and killed several of them. He was no billed, not indicted. I don’t believe they were carrying any guns from what I recall, they just tried to assault and rob him.
LEO are Civilians.
LEO isn't held to the same standards as Non-LEO, change my mind.
LEO are Civilians.
LEO isn't held to the same standards as Non-LEO, change my mind.
No. LEOs are not ”civilians” while operating in an official capacity.
Yes, LEOs arent held to the same standard as a non-LEO. Why should they? Its a totally different scope. Standards are adjusted to work for that particular field, it is not about the individual.
Yes, they are. But then again the whole "the streets are a warzone" really gets hammered into their brains.
A civilian is a person not a member of an armed force nor a person engaged in hostilities.[1]
It is slightly different from a non-combatant, because some non-combatants are not civilians (for example, military chaplains who are attached to the belligerent party or military personnel who are serving with a neutral country). Civilians in the territories of a party to an armed conflict are entitled to certain privileges under the customary laws of war and international treaties such as the Fourth Geneva Convention. The privileges that they enjoy under international law depends on whether the conflict is an internal one (a civil war) or an international one
Aka, Lower Standards, lower expectations