Folks fearing the Gov't and Police don't have to worry...

[Prepping]

Looks like they want to disarm the police and military and create a new level of liability...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/01...th-safer-ammo/

[hawk55732]

Originally Posted by Prepping

Looks like they want to disarm the police and military and create a new level of liability...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/01...th-safer-ammo/

Where does it say they want to disarm the military and police and what do you mean by create a new level of liability? The article doesnt even mention the military using it. The only mention of the military is that it is named after the guys cousin.

[Prepping]

Originally Posted by hawk55732

Where does it say they want to disarm the military and police and what do you mean by create a new level of liability? The article doesnt even mention the military using it. The only mention of the military is that it is named after the guys cousin.

Hawk, please just move on...

I've dealt with you before and you're not able to link the dots. It was a nightmare trying to convey simple notions to you...and you were too dense to understand anything like cause and effect, if, then, etc.,...it was like wading through muck.

Please just move on to another thread...don't be offended, this isn't about you, please don't try to make it about you AGAIN, just go!

[hawk55732]

Originally Posted by Prepping

Hawk, please just move on...

I've dealt with you before and you're not able to link the dots. It was a nightmare trying to convey simple notions to you...and you were too dense to understand anything like cause and effect, if, then, etc.,...it was like wading through muck.

Please just move on to another thread...don't be offended, this isn't about you, please don't try to make it about you AGAIN, just go!

So in other words you have no answers and just make stuff up.

[Prepping]

Originally Posted by hawk55732

So in other words you have no answers and just make stuff up.

I've been nice, asked you to move on. I'll even present the OBVIOUS to anyone with any level of intellect...which excludes you. You won't grasp this absurdly simple explanation, but I did the courtesy of providing it. Others will figure it out on their own.

When any form of 'less lethal' device is introduced, it becomes a gold mine to lawyers engaged in lawsuits. This occurred with batons, OC, EID, and Tasers. The problem is 'less lethal' is a more appropriate term, but some use 'non lethal' which is inaccurate and creates huge problems when someone does die when the device was used, even if the death is actually medically incidental to the use of the less lethal device. Another area where there's a problem with the introduction of new less lethal devices in one area, people are still shot in other instances and their attorneys, representing the 'grieving' but greedy families demand to know why the new less lethal device wasn't used, and why real bullets were fired at the deceased.

[Rickroll]

I am not seeing the military connection either. Will I be so cutely asked to leave?

[SunwolfNC]

So you'd be ok with firing real bullets into a crowd of protesters like, say, iran does?

Sounds like you have a more logical argument for tort reform than trying to justify where you get 'they want to disarm the military' from that article in my opinion.

[hawk55732]

Originally Posted by Prepping

I've been nice, asked you to move on. I'll even present the OBVIOUS to anyone with any level of intellect...which excludes you. You won't grasp this absurdly simple explanation, but I did the courtesy of providing it. Others will figure it out on their own.

When any form of 'less lethal' device is introduced, it becomes a gold mine to lawyers engaged in lawsuits. This occurred with batons, OC, EID, and Tasers. The problem is 'less lethal' is a more appropriate term, but some use 'non lethal' which is inaccurate and creates huge problems when someone does die when the device was used, even if the death is actually medically incidental to the use of the less lethal device. Another area where there's a problem with the introduction of new less lethal devices in one area, people are still shot in other instances and their attorneys, representing the 'grieving' but greedy families demand to know why the new less lethal device wasn't used, and why real bullets were fired at the deceased.

You asked me nicely? You called me dense and insinuated that I was stupid. In what place is that asking nicely?

[Prepping]

Originally Posted by SunwolfNC

So you'd be ok with firing real bullets into a crowd of protesters like, say, iran does?

Sounds like you have a more logical argument for tort reform than trying to justify where you get 'they want to disarm the military' from that article in my opinion.

Well, since we've got the military doing arrests in a war, and we've seen the problem where IDF in the 1980's already faced the same inevitable situation with pressing less lethal plastic rounds on their soldiers, it's pretty predictable that this is going to spread. I'm making assumptions here that most folks who are responding have a clue as to the use of less lethal devices by the military in the past, and how, historically, these devices, developed for law enforcement are utilized by the military, whether it's at routine MP duty, Brig, crowd control, or peace keeper operations levels. The Brits faced this problem with baton rounds in Northern Ireland, we've some border patrol armed with less lethal rounds already.

[Prepping]

Originally Posted by hawk55732

You asked me nicely? You called me dense and insinuated that I was stupid. In what place is that asking nicely?

I'd normally hit a leg rider with a newspaper to the nose and provide a good swift parting kick, so that's nice.

Yip yip!

This isn't about you...

[hawk55732]

Originally Posted by Prepping

I'd normally hit a leg rider with a newspaper to the nose and provide a good swift parting kick, so that's nice.

Yip yip!

This isn't about you...

I never said it was. I asked a simple question. YOU made it about me.

[Prepping]

One problem they found with less lethal devices occurred in Boston:

http://www.policeone.com/police-prod...N303-incident/

Was that case really that long ago? Geez time flies! This girl wasn't a protester. She was merely a fan among a crowd either sitting or standing in the distance beyond the intended target.