Yep... and I am that someone:suthdj wrote:You do understand someone here will find one and post it.03Lightningrocks wrote:baldeagle wrote:Typical liberal news media garbage.Jaguar wrote:Pffft - it's all an urban myth. Nothing to see here, move along. Just a few random assaults.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... h/3729635/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
We need a vomit smiley.
Well, it's not on TV (AFAIK), but breitbart is reporting that Al Sharpton condemns 'knockout' game. So unless the reporter is twisting his words or something, credit where credit is due.Charles L. Cotton wrote:This crime is clearly a black on white crime and, to my knowledge, there has been no report of an attack by a white assailant or a black victim. Did you see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on TV last night calling for an end to this racist, senseless violence? I didn't either, nor did anyone else.
Chas.
In the winter, a jacket with a thick and upturned collar might offer minimal protection. Of course, it's only cold enough to wear those here for about two weeks per year...RJGold wrote:Maybe we all start wearing helmets...???03Lightningrocks wrote:I am just curious about what others might have thought about this whole "game". I have thought about this long and hard. How in the world are we going to know when some thug is going to run up from behind us and cold cock us? I don't care how tough a person is, you get socked on the "button" hard enough, you are going down. So now I am suppose to avoid walking near packs of black teens? I have to avoid walking past any group of young teens? Most of the stories seem to be ghetto black kids but like everything else, it could easily spread to anytown USA and be any race of young teens in a pack.
Dunno, but it sounds fishy to me... And in pretty much any situation in which I'd try for a head shot (active shooter w/body armor and no police on scene comes to mind), I've already decided that I'm willing to take the stand and explain to a jury, "It was either shoot them in the 'wrong' place or let them [keep|start] killing. What would you have done?"03Lightningrocks wrote:Reading the story on the second link I picked up on a comment made below it. The person commented that in their state, one could only shoot in the torso area and below or they would be in trouble for trying to "shoot to kill". Is this for real?
Dunno, but I don't think I'd feel particularly inclined to shoot someone who's clearly running away. Here in TX, if it happens at night, the law gives you some extra room because it's harder to see what the BG is doing. I guess it comes back to that "legal vs moral vs wise" discussion that pops up whenever we start talking about edge conditions.bmwrdr wrote:What would possibly happen if one gets attacked from behind, doesn't go down but shoots the attacker in the back? I can imagine a legal challenge,
It still isn't, as the participants will hopefully find out as soon as they try this on an armed and alert person.Ultra_Solo_Sig_0904 wrote:the difference is back then it wasn't considered a gameCedar Park Dad wrote:In ancient times, we called that a mugging.Ultra_Solo_Sig_0904 wrote:yep the kids are out of control due to lack of parenting, religion, and education. key factors that are destroying this country, but that is all part of the big plan.....
