So actually a shattered wall took out the Dallas Shooter

[westwall]

The objective is not to KILL suspects. Its to bring them into custody. You morons who think it's a good idea to let cops act as judge, jury, executioners arengoing tonseriiusly regret your stupidity in the very near future.

He killed 5 already and wasn't stopping. Since when does law enforcement have to bring in the person who won't give up? LEOs don't have to risk their lives arresting.

They could wait him out. There is absolutely no reason for them to set off bombs to neutralize a guy who is not able to escape. Again, we don't have death squads. At least we didn't used to.
Sturmabteilung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your tactical knowledge is severely lacking.

Bullshit. We don't need militarized, over armed cops who have no obligation to follow, nor understanding of, the constitution.

Wow. That's a looney tune position. The overwhelming majority of line cops are fully in support of the 2nd Amendment. It's only the top brass that are against it. As has been stated before your hero was threatening to detonate bombs with his cell phone (a well known terrorist method) thus the sooner he was dealt with the better.

Face it Kgirl. You're wrong on this one. Sometimes it is totally appropriate for the police to use whatever method they can to deal with a person such as this. The only alternative is to call in the military like they do in Europe but our COTUS prevents that. So, they had to make do with what they had.

 

[westwall]

Hey Westwall, I bet it feels good to know that dannyboys also defends death squads lolol.

I don't defend death squads asshat, nor do I agree with anything that dannyboys has to say most of the time, certainly not his racist BS, but it's YOU who are parroting the BLM bullshit of getting rid of the cops. That's every bit as retarded, and extremist a position.

 

[westwall]

He was told to surrender. He didn't. Due process does not mean you can refuse a lawful order of arrest by a designated officer.

And hindsight is 20/20.

And we're back to basic constitution stuff again..IT DOESN'T MATTER. Disobeying a puke with a badge is not "just cause" to be slaughtered. But let me be clear...I understand the nature of lethal force quite well. I appreciate that sometimes people do kill in defense of innocent life and that can be justified.

My objection, in this case, is to the fact that the COPS HAVE ROBOTIC BOMB SQUADS. They don't need that shit. There is absolutely no reason for it. They are testing it out on *criminals* now, but they will be using it on regular people in the very near future. They always do.

And let me tell you something else...the person who believes everything they hear from the press and from the cops in re these matters is a fool.

First of all, its a remote controlled device, not a robot. Call it a robotic drone, but its not a robot like people think its a robot, no autonomy.

Second, there is no difference between shooting this guy, collapsing a wall on him, or having a flash bang kill him because it landed too close. This was a unique situation, and cops didn't go to it as plan A.

And those "pukes with a badge" are the gateway to the legal system, if you don't go through the gate, how can the process start?

A flash bang will not kill you. It might burn you if it goes off in contact with your skin, or raise a lump when it gets thrown at you, but we use them in training all of the time and have had very few injuries.

Totally untrue. You really don't know what you're talking about do you? Flash bangs can contain up to an equivalent of a quarter stick of dynamite and when they go off in close proximity to a human they are quite lethal as this SWAT officer sadly discovered.


"A Charlotte-Mecklenburg police SWAT officer died Friday evening after being seriously injured in an accident at his home in Mint Hill.

Police identified the officer as Fred Thornton, a veteran of the force.

Thornton was on a SWAT call earlier Friday, had gone home to his house on Tinkerton Court and was checking his equipment when a "distraction device" exploded, according to police chief Rodney Monroe, who spoke at a news conference late Friday night."


N.C. SWAT Officer Killed at Home by Flash Bang | Officer.com

I'm sorry, but you are quite in the wrong. I am a volunteer trainer providing opposition force at an Army Urban Combat Training Center. We train mostly special operations units and some regular military and civilian SWAT teams. I have had literally hundreds of flash-bangs thrown at me in the past nine years. I have never been hurt. They have gone off between my feet as I was in a crouched position, behind my back as I was sitting on the ground, and hundreds of other scenarios, but not once did I sustain an injury. The only injuries that have occurred in those nine years were two persons who were burned when the flash bang exploded in direct contact with their bodies.

M84 stun grenade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As to your link, why would an officer have a "distraction device" in his home? Massive internal injuries? He blew himself up in all likelihood, playing with explosives he should not have been messing with. I am not buying it.

Have a nice day!

Why he had it is immaterial. The fac t is he did and he died from it. The M84 is one of MANY types of flash bangs that exist in the world. Your thought that it is the only one out there, while humorous, is not factual.

 

[Syriusly]

Yes I know what they do. They kill people. Often they kill the wrong people. It has nothing to do with the degree of threat...that guy wasn't posing a threat.

they fulfill the same role the SS fulfilled for the.nazis. Mindless fucking killers.

I don't think this was a case of killing the wrong people...

Perhaps. Perhaps not. The point is, it's a huge mistake to allow your police to become militarized, and to give them leeway to violate the Constitution ..

We don't give cops 'leeway to violate the Constitution'- cops are subject to the law like anyone else.

What law did the police violate? How were this man's Constitutional rights violated?

 

[Syriusly]

The objective is not to KILL suspects. Its to bring them into custody. You morons who think it's a good idea to let cops act as judge, jury, executioners arengoing tonseriiusly regret your stupidity in the very near future.

He killed 5 already and wasn't stopping. Since when does law enforcement have to bring in the person who won't give up? LEOs don't have to risk their lives arresting.

They could wait him out. There is absolutely no reason for them to set off bombs to neutralize a guy who is not able to escape

And you know this because:
a) you were there and know the exact circumstances
b) you are an expert with dealing with armed and dangerous suspects or
c) you just think this must be so because of your bias against police.

 

[Syriusly]

The objective is not to KILL suspects. Its to bring them into custody. You morons who think it's a good idea to let cops act as judge, jury, executioners arengoing tonseriiusly regret your stupidity in the very near future.

He killed 5 already and wasn't stopping. Since when does law enforcement have to bring in the person who won't give up? LEOs don't have to risk their lives arresting.

They could wait him out. There is absolutely no reason for them to set off bombs to neutralize a guy who is not able to escape. Again, we don't have death squads. At least we didn't used to.
Sturmabteilung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your tactical knowledge is severely lacking.

Bullshit. We don't need militarized, over armed cops who have no obligation to follow, nor understanding of, the constitution.

Armed cops have an obligation to follow the Constitution- but they do not have an obligation to follow your interpretation of the Constitution.

 

[westwall]

Yes, citizens were. Two were wounded in the initial attack, and all the asshole had to do was spray bullets out of the parking structure and civilians would be in danger. As far as the police go they had already had 12 shot, isn't that enough for you? Fuck him. I wouldn't risk anyone else's life trying to take down a asshole like that. Their lives have value. Not his.

Which has zero to do with the fact that cops don't need robotic bombs, and that it's wrong for them to stage executions.

Which has been shown they don't. They jury rigged a bomb on a multi thousand dollar robot to save lives. That was the safest, best way to deal with a madman. Period end of story. And for the record I am all over keeping cops from being able to wage war on the citizenry. I am all for mandating that cops wear body cameras and I would like to see four or more cameras on police cars to get 360 degree coverage. But, in a situation like this the cops did the best with what they had and you are flat out wrong.

There was no jury-rigged bomb. The charges are normally used to destroy suspected explosive devices. It is done ALL the time!

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

 

[Syriusly]

Not at all. The rise of.our militarized leo and federalized (and unconstitutional) agencies like the fbi and the usfws are so much like stormtrooper and ss implementation it is giving people with an understanding of history and philosophy ptsd. I was talking to my niece, who has a phd in philosophy (and who is an ER physician who worked er in Minneapolis...and subsequently has an abiding hatred for that city and its out of control coppage) is saying it. A lot. You wouldn't think people could be so blind..but they are.

What the fuck did the US Fish and Wildlife Service ever do to you? Bust you for poaching deer? Caught you fishing without a license?

Anytime someone equates the United States of America to the fucking Third Reich, I know I'm dealing with either a liar or a nut job.

Well I think it is obvious that KG is both a liar and a nut job.

 

[Syriusly]

Which has zero to do with the fact that cops don't need robotic bombs, and that it's wrong for them to stage executions.

Which has been shown they don't. They jury rigged a bomb on a multi thousand dollar robot to save lives. That was the safest, best way to deal with a madman. Period end of story. And for the record I am all over keeping cops from being able to wage war on the citizenry. I am all for mandating that cops wear body cameras and I would like to see four or more cameras on police cars to get 360 degree coverage. But, in a situation like this the cops did the best with what they had and you are flat out wrong.

There was no jury-rigged bomb. The charges are normally used to destroy suspected explosive devices. It is done ALL the time!

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

How robot, explosives killed Dallas sniper - CNN.com

The 790-pound robot can be mounted with a variety of sensors, cameras, and attachments. Its arm, once fully extended, can lift 60 pounds and the end can grip with 50 pounds of force, according to manufacturer documents.

It generally carries a flashbang, a device that emits a bright light and loud sound. Sometimes these robots are used to place an explosive near a bomb in order to disarm it via explosion.

 

[koshergrl]

Hey Westwall, I bet it feels good to know that dannyboys also defends death squads lolol.

I don't defend death squads asshat, nor do I agree with anything that dannyboys has to say most of the time, certainly not his racist BS, but it's YOU who are parroting the BLM bullshit of getting rid of the cops. That's every bit as retarded, and extremist a position.

I do not stupidly assume that just because there are criminals hitching a ride on the BLM express that there is no case for LEO overreach, murder, and bigotry in the cities.

I've seen how it works in the rural areas. You get a couple of loud mouthed morons and instantly everybody is like "NOTHING TO SEE HERE! ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE JUST LIARS!"

You're an apologist for corruption if you think that cops should be allowed to shit on the constitution in the name of "safety". What a joke.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And we're back to basic constitution stuff again..IT DOESN'T MATTER. Disobeying a puke with a badge is not "just cause" to be slaughtered. But let me be clear...I understand the nature of lethal force quite well. I appreciate that sometimes people do kill in defense of innocent life and that can be justified.

My objection, in this case, is to the fact that the COPS HAVE ROBOTIC BOMB SQUADS. They don't need that shit. There is absolutely no reason for it. They are testing it out on *criminals* now, but they will be using it on regular people in the very near future. They always do.

And let me tell you something else...the person who believes everything they hear from the press and from the cops in re these matters is a fool.

First of all, its a remote controlled device, not a robot. Call it a robotic drone, but its not a robot like people think its a robot, no autonomy.

Second, there is no difference between shooting this guy, collapsing a wall on him, or having a flash bang kill him because it landed too close. This was a unique situation, and cops didn't go to it as plan A.

And those "pukes with a badge" are the gateway to the legal system, if you don't go through the gate, how can the process start?

A flash bang will not kill you. It might burn you if it goes off in contact with your skin, or raise a lump when it gets thrown at you, but we use them in training all of the time and have had very few injuries.

Totally untrue. You really don't know what you're talking about do you? Flash bangs can contain up to an equivalent of a quarter stick of dynamite and when they go off in close proximity to a human they are quite lethal as this SWAT officer sadly discovered.


"A Charlotte-Mecklenburg police SWAT officer died Friday evening after being seriously injured in an accident at his home in Mint Hill.

Police identified the officer as Fred Thornton, a veteran of the force.

Thornton was on a SWAT call earlier Friday, had gone home to his house on Tinkerton Court and was checking his equipment when a "distraction device" exploded, according to police chief Rodney Monroe, who spoke at a news conference late Friday night."


N.C. SWAT Officer Killed at Home by Flash Bang | Officer.com

I'm sorry, but you are quite in the wrong. I am a volunteer trainer providing opposition force at an Army Urban Combat Training Center. We train mostly special operations units and some regular military and civilian SWAT teams. I have had literally hundreds of flash-bangs thrown at me in the past nine years. I have never been hurt. They have gone off between my feet as I was in a crouched position, behind my back as I was sitting on the ground, and hundreds of other scenarios, but not once did I sustain an injury. The only injuries that have occurred in those nine years were two persons who were burned when the flash bang exploded in direct contact with their bodies.

M84 stun grenade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As to your link, why would an officer have a "distraction device" in his home? Massive internal injuries? He blew himself up in all likelihood, playing with explosives he should not have been messing with. I am not buying it.

Have a nice day!

Why he had it is immaterial. The fac t is he did and he died from it. The M84 is one of MANY types of flash bangs that exist in the world. Your thought that it is the only one out there, while humorous, is not factual.

He probably died from misconduct.

That is the type of flash bang used by military and police units everywhere. They were used by the SEALs during the raid on Bin Laden's compound.

Now, you prove they used something else.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Which has zero to do with the fact that cops don't need robotic bombs, and that it's wrong for them to stage executions.

Which has been shown they don't. They jury rigged a bomb on a multi thousand dollar robot to save lives. That was the safest, best way to deal with a madman. Period end of story. And for the record I am all over keeping cops from being able to wage war on the citizenry. I am all for mandating that cops wear body cameras and I would like to see four or more cameras on police cars to get 360 degree coverage. But, in a situation like this the cops did the best with what they had and you are flat out wrong.

There was no jury-rigged bomb. The charges are normally used to destroy suspected explosive devices. It is done ALL the time!

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

 

[westwall]

Which has been shown they don't. They jury rigged a bomb on a multi thousand dollar robot to save lives. That was the safest, best way to deal with a madman. Period end of story. And for the record I am all over keeping cops from being able to wage war on the citizenry. I am all for mandating that cops wear body cameras and I would like to see four or more cameras on police cars to get 360 degree coverage. But, in a situation like this the cops did the best with what they had and you are flat out wrong.

There was no jury-rigged bomb. The charges are normally used to destroy suspected explosive devices. It is done ALL the time!

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There was no jury-rigged bomb. The charges are normally used to destroy suspected explosive devices. It is done ALL the time!

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

The link provided by another poster just explained in detail why you were wrong and continue to be wrong on just about everything in this thread.

 

[westwall]

Yes, it was. They use a shotgun to blast the bombs apart, and, when they do use sympathetic detonation to set off a suspect device it is a small amount of explosive used, usually Det Cord, This was a pound of C4 (according to reports) which is a huuuuge amount, and they had to sacrifice the robot to do it. In a controlled demolition they set a small charge and then move the robot away and set off the charge remotely.

None of that was done in this case.

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

The link provided by another poster just explained in detail why you were wrong and continue to be wrong on just about everything in this thread.

No, it doesn't. It merely talks about another system. Amazingly enough there are multiple methodologies used. It is only you who claims there is only one way. Extremeists are simply nuts, and you have proven that to be true here. It is YOU who have been shown to be wrong.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Got a link to all of that?

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

The link provided by another poster just explained in detail why you were wrong and continue to be wrong on just about everything in this thread.

No, it doesn't. It merely talks about another system. Amazingly enough there are multiple methodologies used. It is only you who claims there is only one way. Extremeists are simply nuts, and you have proven that to be true here. It is YOU who have been shown to be wrong.

I will ask you again. Where is your link?

Pure conjecture is all you have.

 

[westwall]

"The light you're seeing is from non-el, a plastic tube with low explosives used to fire the Percussion Actuated Neutralizer or PAN (basically a remotely fired shotgun that uses specialized slugs or water to rip apart a device). A flash of light travels quickly through the tube and the low speed of the camera caught the full path."

The bomb squad at my university blew up a bag yesterday

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

The link provided by another poster just explained in detail why you were wrong and continue to be wrong on just about everything in this thread.

No, it doesn't. It merely talks about another system. Amazingly enough there are multiple methodologies used. It is only you who claims there is only one way. Extremeists are simply nuts, and you have proven that to be true here. It is YOU who have been shown to be wrong.

I will ask you again. Where is your link?

Pure conjecture is all you have.

Already provided. Click on it.

 

[blastoff]

Oh, gosh don't you just hate it when an exploding wall kills a murderous racist? Guess the puke was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This is the problem with the patriot movement as well. You fucking yahoos are too stupid to realize that militarized, unconstitutional kill squads are still unconstitutional and still pose a threat, even when they accidentally kill the right people.

No accident at all in Dallas. Well planned and - no pun intended - executed.

Yeah fuck the pigs. I don't care for heavily armed, out of control military police roaming our streets and thinking they have the right to blow people and shoot people just because the people deserve it. I guess that's the difference between being an American who values freedom, and being a mindless slave cop whore, like you.

Let's see...who was heavily armed roaming the streets thinking he had the right to blow people away? Oh, yeah, it was the black racist murderous thug piece of shit. BOOM! Problem solved.

 

[martybegan]

Supposedly threatening more death, taking pot shots, and maybe he had demolition devices.

His due process was started when they gave him a lawful order to surrender, repeatedly. He refused, repeatedly. At that point the government met its burden to try to take him alive, and his death is on his own hands.

He didn't have demolition devices.
Pot shots meh.
"Supposedly threatening more death"...ooooooohhhhhhhh..

He was told to surrender. He didn't. Due process does not mean you can refuse a lawful order of arrest by a designated officer.

And hindsight is 20/20.

And we're back to basic constitution stuff again..IT DOESN'T MATTER. Disobeying a puke with a badge is not "just cause" to be slaughtered. But let me be clear...I understand the nature of lethal force quite well. I appreciate that sometimes people do kill in defense of innocent life and that can be justified.

My objection, in this case, is to the fact that the COPS HAVE ROBOTIC BOMB SQUADS. They don't need that shit. There is absolutely no reason for it. They are testing it out on *criminals* now, but they will be using it on regular people in the very near future. They always do.

And let me tell you something else...the person who believes everything they hear from the press and from the cops in re these matters is a fool.

First of all, its a remote controlled device, not a robot. Call it a robotic drone, but its not a robot like people think its a robot, no autonomy.

Second, there is no difference between shooting this guy, collapsing a wall on him, or having a flash bang kill him because it landed too close. This was a unique situation, and cops didn't go to it as plan A.

And those "pukes with a badge" are the gateway to the legal system, if you don't go through the gate, how can the process start?

Which is also why police do not 'shoot to wound' when dealing with an armed and extremely dangerous suspect.

If they had had a clean shot at him they would have been fully justified in shooting him in that situation.

"Shoot to wound" is one of the more dangerous ideas floated around for multiple reasons, the first being that it is much harder than movies make it out to be, the 2nd is that it would trivialize the decision to use deadly force, and the third is that it means aiming at something other than center mass, which results in more bullets flying around to hit bystanders.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Still waiting on the link showing that anything you claimed happened in Dallas actually occurred and is not a figment of an overactive imagination.

Got any actual support, or are we just supposed to believe your stories?

Ummm, it's in the news. The police don't place one pound charges of C4 near bombs to detonate them The picture I posted shows the shotgun mounted and the link I provided is a EOD person explaining how they use them. Occasionally they will place a small charge near a suspected bomb but invariably they use a Ammonium Nitrate/Nitro Methane based bomb due to it's slower rate of expansion (12,600 fps vs the 34,000 fps of the C4) which lowers the dangerous space distance.

The link provided by another poster just explained in detail why you were wrong and continue to be wrong on just about everything in this thread.

No, it doesn't. It merely talks about another system. Amazingly enough there are multiple methodologies used. It is only you who claims there is only one way. Extremeists are simply nuts, and you have proven that to be true here. It is YOU who have been shown to be wrong.

I will ask you again. Where is your link?

Pure conjecture is all you have.

Already provided. Click on it.

Really? Where? If you are talking about the link in the quoted message, that is proof of your inability to comprehend the written word. I feel very sorry for you.