-
There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.
two interesting altternatives to lethal force
- Thread starter cuznjohn
- Start date
Orange Spyder Man
New member
I prefer using the original method.. 
osm
osm
Bob Denman
New member
Sam Mac
New member
If you did that I'd run........... :roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:
Dmpsam
New member
Lmao!
Id like to see that fight!!
Bob Denman
New member
When I do that: the Missus runs...laughing! :shocked:
Machinegunner
New member
How is the cop supposed to place the orange devise on his weapon when the perp is trying to take it away from him. And what if the officer has the devise on his gun and the perp knocks it off during a altercation? Does he go to jail because it came off before he shot?
Bob Denman
New member
Two to the "Center of Mass", and the :cus:-head will always stop trying to take your sidearm away... nojoke
Copperman
Active member
This is just another "Less Lethal" way to subdue someone. And never take "Less Lethal" to a gun fight.
Also, whenever an officer is going to use Less Lethal, he will always have a "cover officer" at his side. If a cover officer is not around, less lethal is never deployed.
Often times when an officer uses deadly force, the situation escalates in a matter of seconds. That's not when less lethal is used.
116 and counting.
Copperman
Active member
I don't buy that for a minute! Every shot has to be justified. I'm sure you misunderstood what he said.
SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN
New member
I would rather have that then a gun to kill
Bob Denman
New member
It (sort of) makes decent sense...If you can justify the first shot: it's logical to assume that any subsequent shots which are needed to end the threat, would also be justified.
"to end the threat", is the key phrase... nojoke
Mazo EMS2
Active member
I prefer using the original method..
osm
Me too. I feel like if an officer feels he needs to fire his weapon, then he should be able to use it as intended. In most of the cases where there have been questionable shootings, I don't think there would have been time to deploy the alternative. It is interesting though.
Navvet
New member
No, a trained LEO must justify every shot. A civilian in a moment of crises does not need to.
Gray Ghost
New member
If I am in a situation where I feel it is necessary to draw a firearm it will be too serious to muck around with salt or any other "less lethal" means. Most places I have been will even prosecute people for firing warning shots, reasoning that if you felt that you could shoot a warning shot then you really weren't in fear for your life.
Besides in any situation where you are confronting someone, they have a choice of action too. When you point a weapon at them, even if they are in the wrong, they may not recognize that you are going for less lethal and their response to your attempt may be deadly to you.
Besides in any situation where you are confronting someone, they have a choice of action too. When you point a weapon at them, even if they are in the wrong, they may not recognize that you are going for less lethal and their response to your attempt may be deadly to you.
Orange Spyder Man
New member
I prefer to be judged by 12 ... than carried by 6 ..
osm
osm
SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN
New member
how about a 3rd alternative, shoot him in the balls
Similar threads
