Monster Hunter Nation

The Legalities of Shooting People

I’m writing this blog post because I’ve seen a lot of really ignorant comments from a lot of otherwise intelligent folks about some recent shootings. It is really easy to be swayed by knee jerk emotion, but luckily we live in America, where we have a justice system based on evidence and the rule of law. I’m not going to get into the Brown shooting too much because I wasn’t on the grand jury and haven’t read the evidence presented in that particular case, but I’m going to explain how use of force laws work so I don’t have to keep repeating myself.

This will vary state by state, but these are the fundamentals for most places in the US. There are some legal differences between police and regular folks shooting people, but basically the rules are similar. I’m not an attorney in your state, and this is not meant as legal advice for your state. Again, this isn’t meant as legal advice, rather as a primer to get people to not be so damned ignorant about the fundamentals of how the law works.

And the law usually does work.

I’m going to keep this simple. Before I became a novelist, I was a Utah Concealed Weapons instructor for many years. I’m condensing a few hours of lecture and discussion into one article.  Again, this will vary state by state.

First off we must understand some terms.

Lethal Force is exercising an action against someone which may potentially take their life. If you shoot somebody and they don’t die, you still exercised Lethal Force. If you shoot somebody in the leg or arm, legally that is still Lethal Force, and contrary to the movies, you can still die if get shot in the arm or the leg (but we train to shoot for center of mass, more on why later).

Serious Bodily Harm (often called Grievous Bodily Harm) is any injury that is potentially life altering or life threatening. Rape is serious bodily harm. A beating is serious bodily harm. Anything that may render you unconscious is serious bodily harm.

Reasonable Man – I will often refer to this. The question isn’t whether the shooter perceives themselves to be justified, but whether a “reasonable man” would perceive you to be justified. Contrary to popular opinion, you can’t just say “he was coming right at me!” and be justified in shooting somebody. The evidence will be examined and the question will be if you made the assumptions a reasonable man would make, and acted in a manner which seems reasonable based on that evidence. This is where the jury comes in, because they are a group of reasonable people who are going to look at your actions and your situation and make a call.  Basically, do your actions make sense to them? Would they believe similar things in the same situation?

To be legally justified in using lethal force against somebody you need to meet the following criteria.

  1. They have the Ability to cause you serious bodily harm.
  2. They have the Opportunity to cause you serious bodily harm.
  3. They are acting in a manner which suggests they are an Immediate Threat of serious bodily harm.

If your encounter fits these three criteria, then you are usually legally justified in using lethal force.

Let’s break each one down a bit.

Ability just means that they have the power to hurt you. A gun or a knife can obviously cause serious bodily harm. However, a person does not need a weapon to seriously hurt you. Any blow to the head sufficient to render you unconscious or cause internal bleeding is sufficient to kill you.

Opportunity means that they can reach you with their ability. A hundred yards away with a gun, they can still hit you, so they have the opportunity. A hundred yards away with a knife, pipe, or chain, and they aren’t a danger to you. However, thirty feet away with a contact weapon is easily within range to cause most people serious bodily harm before they are capable of using a firearm to neutralize the threat. I’ll talk more about distances later.

Immediacy (often called Jeopardy) means that they are acting in a manner that suggests they intend to cause serious bodily harm right now. Somebody can have the ability and opportunity, but if a reasonable person wouldn’t believe that they are acting like a threat, then they aren’t one.

###

Now let’s break this down in more depth.

Under Ability you will see self-defense experts refer to Disparity of Force, this is where there is such a physical disparity between two individuals that Ability is assumed. I’m 6’5, 300, and I’ve rendered people unconscious with my bare hands. If I’m unarmed, but I am attacking an average sized person, and they shoot me, then a reasonable person could assume that there was a disparity of force, and they were justified in shooting me. Usually when a man attacks a woman, or a fit strong young person attacks a frail old person, then disparity of force is assumed.

However, you don’t have to be bigger or stronger (it only helps convince the reasonable people you are justified). Regardless of size, if you knock someone down and are sitting on them and raining blows on their head, then you are demonstrating the ability to cause them serious bodily harm. A small woman could brain a big strong man over the head with a rock and proceed to beat them, thus demonstrating ability.

A person doesn’t need to even demonstrate that he’s got the ability, he just needs to act in a manner that would suggest to a reasonable person that he did. If you tell somebody, “Give me your purse or I’ll shoot you,” but you don’t show them your gun, a reasonable person would assume that you wouldn’t make that threat if you didn’t have the ability. You don’t need to wait to see the muzzle flash to confirm their gun is real. That’s suicidal.

On the distance someone can reasonably be a threat with just a contact weapon, you’d be surprised. It is easy to underestimate how much distance a human being can cover in a very short period of time. During my classes I used a series of role playing scenarios to demonstrate various issues and test the shoot/no shoot decision making process. While playing an aggressor I routinely covered in excess of twenty feet and caused serious bodily harm before most students could even draw their gun, let alone aim.

Gun people have all heard of the Tueller drill, which demonstrated that the average person could cover about 21 feet before the average police officer could draw and fire a shot (and as we’ll see later, one shot doesn’t often mean much, assuming it hits something vital). That’s average. Basically, without going into a whole lot of detail, the reasonable people are usually stunned to learn how much distance can be covered to provide opportunity.

The last one is the most complicated. Say a man with a gun has Ability and Opportunity, but if he is just minding his own business with the gun in the holster, slung, or being carried in a non-threatening manner then he’s not acting as an immediate threat. But if he is acting like he is going to use it or waving it around, now he is acting like an immediate threat.  Again, it all comes down to how a reasonable person would perceive it.

This is why it is silly when anti-gun people start ranting about how they’re justified in harming people who are openly carrying firearms on their person. Nope. #3, unless they’re acting in a manner that suggests they’re an immediate threat, then they’re fine. Otherwise it would be legally justifiable to shoot everybody like me that shops at the Xtra Large Casual Male outlet because of disparity of force. You can’t just have Ability or Opportunity, they must be acting in a manner which a reasonable person would take to be a threat.

You’ve got to have all three.

In most states these rules apply to yourself or a third person being the potential recipient of serious bodily harm, however I believe there are still some states where it is only for you, and not a bystander. Some states suck.

You’ll hear people talking (usually ignorantly) about Castle Doctrine or Duty to Retreat. Some states require you to try and flee before exercising Lethal Force, and it allows the prosecution to question your inability to flee. Some states require you to flee your own home. Most states don’t have that.

Not that escaping or avoiding isn’t a great idea if given the opportunity, but it sucks to have a prosecutor second guessing your running ability.

###

Violent encounters are a triangle. There are three aspects to every violent encounter, the legal side (the decisions that keep you out of jail), the tactical side (the decisions that keep you alive), and the moral side (the decisions that let you sleep at night). These don’t always all match up neatly. There are times when you can be totally legally justified but tactically stupid.

Say somebody breaks into your house. Before you’ve even seen them you can make some assumptions, they came into your house while you are home, they probably wouldn’t do that if they didn’t have the ability, now they’ve certainly got the opportunity, and their presence is an immediate threat. So you’re legally justified, however you still need to identify the target before firing to make sure that it is actually a threat, and not some mistaken identity shooting, your drunk teenager, or the neighbors autistic kid.

I worked primarily with regular folks, and a little with the police. Their triangle is different. There are situations where a permit holder might be legally justified in getting involved, but tactically they are probably going to get killed, so their best bet is to run away. In fact, in most scenarios avoidance is the best answer, and in the vast majority of real life violent encounters involving a permit holder, no shots are fired, because simply producing the gun is enough to deter the attacker.

One thing the permit holders I taught needed to get through their heads was that they weren’t cops. Their permit was simply a license to carry a concealed firearm in order to defend themselves from violence. Luckily the vast majority of permit holders get that.

###

Cops on the other hand are expected to respond to violent people and apprehend them. As a result police have what is known as the Use of Force Pyramid.  That means that they are to respond with the lowest amount of force necessary to stop any given situation. That is why they are expected to use tasers or pepper spray before they use physical force or guns. Their goal is to stop the situation, and they’ll try to respond with one level more force than the person they’re trying to stop. However, and this is a BIG damned however, just like the rules for regular people above, if they are in immediate danger of serious bodily harm, then they are justified in using lethal force.

Tasers and pepper spray are not magic. Most people’s understanding of these tools comes from TV and TV isn’t reality. Tasers don’t knock you unconscious. They stream electricity through your body which causes your muscles to lock up for a moment, and if the circuit ends (the tiny wires break or the barbs fall out) then you are back to normal and it is game on. (and I’m talking about air tasers, the little stun guns or “drive tasers” are useless toys. They feel like being pinched with a red hot pair of pliers, which sucks, but if you’re tough enough you can play tag with the damned things). Pepper spray hurts and makes it hard to see and breathe, but you can build up a resistance to it (ask anybody in prison) and it can also bounce back on the user. In reality these tools work sometimes and sometimes they don’t. You’ll note that when you see cops dealing with actual violent types and they use the less lethal tools, there is usually cop #2 standing there with a real gun in case Plan A doesn’t work.

Then there is going hands on, “pain compliance techniques” (arm bars, wrist locks, and wrestling until you say enough of this crap and let them put the cuffs on) but like anything in life that requires physical force one human being to another, these things are dangerous too, and bad things might happen. Bones break, arteries are cut off, people get hurt, sometimes they die.

But the cops are going to try to respond to their subject a level above what the subject is using, until they surrender or comply. Which means that if they think you are going to lethal force, they are going to go to lethal force, and the time it takes to switch gears is measured in fractions of a second.

When a cop shoots somebody, depending on the state, it now goes before whatever they use for Reasonable People.

If you try to wrestle away a cop’s gun, that demonstrates Ability, Opportunity, and Immediacy, because right after you get ahold of that firearm, the reasonable assumption is going to be that you’re intending to use it. If you fight a cop, and he thinks you’re going to lethal force, he’s going to repeatedly place bullets into your center of mass until you quit.

Everybody who carries a gun, whether they be police or not, are trained to shoot for the middle of the largest available target, which is normally the center of mass, and to do so repeatedly until the threat stops. Contrary to the movies, pistols aren’t death rays. A pistol bullet simply pokes a hole. Usually when somebody is stopped by being shot it is A. Psychological (as in holy crap! I’m shot! That hurt! I surrender), but if they keep going it is until B. Physiological (as in a drop in blood pressure sufficient for them to cease hostilities) If that hole poked is in a vital organ, then the attacker will stop faster. If it isn’t in a vital organ, they will stop slower. Pistols do not pick people up, nor do they throw people back. Pistol bullets are usually insufficiently powerful to break significant bones.

Shooting people who are actively trying to harm you while under pressure is actually very hard, which is why people often miss. This is why you aim for the biggest available target and continue shooting until they stop doing whatever it is that caused you to shoot them in the first place.

You’ll hear ignorant people say “why didn’t you just shoot them in the arm/leg?” That is foolishness. Legally and tactically, they’re both still lethal force. Only if they bleed to death in a minute because you severed their femoral artery, they’re not any less dead, only they had one more minute to continue trying to murder you. Basically limb hits are difficult to pull off with the added bonus of being terribly unreliable stoppers.

##

In a fatal shooting you’ll often hear someone say “there was only one side to the story told.” That is false.

In the aftermath of any shooting, whether it is police or the general public, there is going to be an investigation. There will be evidence gathered. There will be witnesses. There will be an autopsy. There is always multiple sides to any shooting, even if it is just the autopsy results.

Contrary to the media narrative, most police officers don’t want to shoot anyone, regardless of their skin color. Those of us who carry guns don’t want to shoot anybody. One big reason is that because after we had to make that awful shoot/no-shoot decision in a terrifying fraction of a second, then hundreds of people are going to spend thousands of man hours gathering evidence, then they are going to argue about our actions, analyze our every move, guess at our thoughts, and debate whether we were reasonable or not, all from the comfort of an air conditioned room, and if they get hungry, they’ll order pizza. When all is said and done, these people will have a million times longer to decide if what you did in those seconds was justified or not. No pressure.

Each state is different, but if there is any question as to the justification of the shooting, there is usually some form of grand jury, and if there is sufficient question or evidence of wrong doing, then the shooter will be indicted.

Now, an argument can be made as to how shootings—especially those committed by law enforcement officers who are expected to exercise a higher standard of care—should be investigated. However, no matter how the shooting is investigated, it should be done through our constitutional protections and our agreed upon legal system. No one should ever be convicted through the court of public opinion or the media.

In ten years of studying violent encounters and learning everything I could about every shooting I could, I never once found a newspaper article that got all the facts right. Usually they weren’t even close. In that same time period I offered free training in Use of Force to reporters or detractors, and never once had any of them take me up on it.

You may believe that grand juries are too soft on police involved shootings. That may be a valid argument. You may believe that prosecutors are too lenient on police officers because they both work for the government and there is an existing relationship between the prosecutors and the police. That may be a valid argument. Burning down Little Ceasers isn’t the answer.

There are stupid cops, and there are cops who make mistakes. As representatives of an extremely powerful state, they should be held to a higher standard. Just because somebody works for the government doesn’t make them infallible, and if they screw up and kill somebody for a stupid reason, they should have the book thrown at them, but damn if it doesn’t help to know what actually happened before you form up your angry lynch mob!

Violent encounters are complex, and the only thing they have in common is that they all suck. Going into any investigation with preconceived notions is foolish. Making decisions as to right or wrong before you’ve seen any of the evidence is asinine. If you are a nationally elected official, like say for example the President of the United States, who repeatedly feels the need to chime in on local crime issues before you know any facts, you are partly to blame for the resulting unrest, and should probably go have a Beer Summit.

You can’t complain about the bias in our justice system against some groups, and how the state unfairly prosecutes some more than others, and then immediately demand doing away with the burden of proof, so the state can more freely prosecute. Blacks are prosecuted more and sentenced more harshly, so your solution is to remove more of the restraints on the state’s prosecutorial powers, and you think that’ll make things better? You want people to be prosecuted based on feelings rather than evidence, and you think that’ll help? The burden of proof exists as a protection for the people from the state. We have a system for a reason. Angry mob rule based on an emotional fact-free version of events isn’t the answer.

So my request is this, at least learn how stuff works before forming a super strong opinion on it.

Black Friday Deals on Audiobooks from me!
If you are going to Christmas shop on Amazon, my links are like a tip jar.

Leave a Reply

321 Comments on "The Legalities of Shooting People"


Guest
Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Reblogged this on The Pissed Off Tree Rat and commented:
Awesome from the Lord of Hate

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Awesome and clear Larry.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Wow!!!! I got a first comment. Is there a sticker for that?

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

Only if this is still 1998.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I’m still in 1976.

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

In that case, you get two stickers.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I’ve participated in Tueller drills before. We used Simunitions and had three rounds. Our backs were turned to the supposed threat, we had to turn and draw our weapon and fire or not, depending on if the person was a threat or not.

When it was my turn, the person was a threat. I managed to draw my weapon. One round hit the attacker in the low abdomen, the second round hit him in the wrist as it was crossing his body and I don’t know what happened to the third round.

What I remember from doing it is that all of my attention was on the attacker. It was draw the weapon, and bang, bang, bang as fast as I could an then stepping out of the way so he wouldn’t slam into me.

Twenty one feet is nothing.

We also ran the drill laying on our backs, trying to get up. Unless you are inhumanely fast, you probably won’t be getting up.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

At one of Ayoobs LFI courses, I was on the other side of that drill.

I was prone in the jesus position on the ground, and the person “covering” me was standing 21 feet away from me.

I took me 2.3 seconds to push myself off the ground, and charge and tackle him.

You’re damned straight 7 yards is nothing. If you let a determined man with a knife get that close, he is going to seriously screw you up or kill you.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Mythbusters confirmed this one as well, IIRC.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Oops, replied to wrong comment above. The Mythbusters clip was supposed to go here.

Guest
Zsuzsa
1 year 6 months ago

Thank you so much for a clear discussion of the issues involved.

I am a little surprised, though, that none of the journalists took you up on the Use of Force training. I know few j-school graduates would ever want to touch an icky, nasty gun themselves, but you’d think they’d be sufficiently curious to want to know something about the subject on which they’re reporting.

Guest
piotr1600
1 year 6 months ago

I *routinely* email local reporters when they screw up basically everything possible about firearms (An “assault pistol”, really?And it uses ‘cop killer bullets’?) and offer to take them to the range – at my expense, and I’ll provide the weapons and ammo.
Larry’s totally right – I’ve never gotten so much as even a response, much less an acceptance.

Guest
Ascher Goodrich
1 year 6 months ago

“Assault pistol”. Is that the pistol with the folding shoulder thingy? I’ve heard those eat babies. Shameful what this country is coming to.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

Reminds me of a magazine article a few years back that tried to resurrect the Great Militia Menace of the ’90s. It stated that militias were armed with handguns and “even more powerful weapons”.

We need a facepalm smilie.

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

They actually have a bunch of the evidence online, so you can look at it if you want. From what I looked at, their decision not to indict sure seems like the right one to me.

I saw one tweet where someone was like, “We only wanted a trial. A trial!” As if all they wanted was the chance for the evidence to be seen and justice to be done. First, that’s kind of what happened. Second, I’m totally sure the angry mob would have been pacified if he’d been found innocent via trial.

Also, it irritates me how they keep calling Brown a “teenager” or, worse, a “child”. Any reasonable person would look at that guy and call him a large man. A young man, yes, but 18 is a man in our country and most others. And considering the way he robbed and bullied a smaller man (shopowner) right before the incident, and the physical force that testimony shows he was displaying against the cop, the ignorance and denial that it takes to call him a child is just staggering.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

The CDC lumps 15-24 year old people into the same category as well when publishing their reports on causes of death.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

That should come as no surprise (the intentional downplaying of Brown’s size). Just think about the first pictures used in the Martin/Zimmerman case. 12 year old, cherubic black child in a football jersey versus hulking, sullen, obviously adult man in a prison-orange shirt.

Not to mention calling one by his first name and the other by his last. Yeah, no effort to shape public opinion in advance of the facts *there*.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Just heard some audio of a protestor, who was so clearly well-informed about the events that he called him “Trayvon Brown.”

Guest
TheOldBear
1 year 6 months ago

On Monday the local fish wrapper’s cover picture showed what must be a junior high school picture of Brown. He looked all of twelve years old.

Guest
BobtheRegisterredFool
1 year 6 months ago

My favorite response to that choice of language is to suggest that those journalists might just as convincingly claimed that Bull Connor was a young boy out walking his dogs when a mob came out of nowhere and set upon him.

Guest
A. Nagy
1 year 6 months ago

A trial like this cannot find people innocent they can only rule guilty or not guilty, this is an important distinction.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

The crowd that was whining for “just a trial” is the same group that came out of the gate in August demanding “justice”. In the words of Inego Montoya; “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” To wit, according to Mirriam Webster:

jus·tice
noun ˈjəs-təs

: the process or result of using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals

In their usage, “fairly judge” never entered in to it. Before they’d heard any evidence (beyond witness testimony that was later changed when the forensics proved the statements to be lies) they’d come to the belief that the cop was guilty and Michael Brown was a victim, because the cop was white and Michael Brown was black. The word they meant to use was “revenge” not “justice”. I’m opposed to lynch mobs whether the hangee is black or white. But at the very least, have the honesty with yourself and those you’re trying to convince, to call your revenge lust what it is.

I’m not trying to deny that racism (in both directions) exists. Of course it does, and I applaud any and all efforts to combat racism. But this shooting wasn’t racism, and countering it with racism of your own isn’t helping.

Guest

[…] By: Larry Correia Monster Hunter Nation […]

Guest
sabrinachase
1 year 6 months ago

In addition, the wearing of a police uniform does not convey a +10 on ranged weapons. Small police departments may not have the funds or facilities for training and practice, and as I am sure Larry can confirm, practice is *vital*. (Yes, in some cases I was getting the same training as a police officer who *coff* needed it more than I did.)

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

NYPD has the nickname “The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight.” The anti-gun culture there goes way back. If you’ve ever heard of a New York reload, its from when cops here were not only forbidden automatics but speed leaders for their revolvers. This was after gangbangers were using Mac-10s. The cops’ response was to carry extra pistols.

I think the most epic NY reload on filmis from Boondock Saints, when the old man tracks down the brothers. The aftermath leaves the cops convinced a whole squad of hitmen must’ve been there.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

The mandatory 11+ pound triggers on all three of the approved NYPD pistols (the SIG Sauer P226 DAO, Smith & Wesson Model 5946 DAO, and Glock 19 with the “New York Trigger”) certainly hasn’t helped their accuracy. The reasoning is apparently that if your department has a problem with negligent discharges, then making the trigger harder to pull will solve that problem better than actually training to use those evil guns properly in the first place.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

No one should have a speed leader. Not ever.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Slightly (but not really) off-topic:

Now, from what I saw of the released evidence, Brown died at 153 feet from the fender of the police car after being hit 6(ish) times, and Wilson fired 10 times. Am I mistaken in thinking that means that Wilson is a pretty damn good shot?

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

That doesn’t really match up with the part I read. What part of the evidence was that in?

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

The statements Bob McCulloch made. Although, apparently, there’s no clear indication of how far apart Brown and Wilson were, though Brown appears to have moved 20-25 feet minimum based on blood spatter while being shot.

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

What I read was some of the actual evidence and testimony. Only some of it, mind. It indicated that the officer had to shoot him to get him to stop beating him up in his car (he said Brown tried to take the gun from him and actually got his hand around it with the gun pointed at the officer). Then Brown ran away, the officer tried to call him to stop, then Brown did stop, then turned and charged at the officer. One of the witnesses likened this charge to football. Hence why the officer shot him a bunch more times. The autopsy results clearly showed that all of the entrance wounds were from the front, none from the back.

When discussing the facts, I would find the actual court documents more reliable than statements to the press or a newspaper’s interpretation of the facts, personally.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/ferguson-shooting/

It’s just difficult to figure out from the labels which one I should be looking at. And it’s hard to “interpret” a statement about distance from car to body, so I didn’t really feel the need to fact-check that one too seriously.

Either way, crazy world where THIS is the biggest news story of the day.

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

I think social media has made this case bigger than riots in past decades. The angry mobs formed online, not just in person. And I think the media is just fueling the fire on this, too. I don’t know, just times are a bit different now than they were the last time something like this happened, I think. The news isn’t really even news anymore, and I don’t think it has been for a while. It’s entertainment, and I think now it’s showing that it’s also an instigator. Not that I’m saying this is the media’s fault, but I think they’ve made it a bigger deal than it would have been 20 years ago.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

From what I keep seeing of the news I am pretty sure they all get a fail on any true journalism classes. True journalism as I understand it is supposed to be completely unbiased and give the facts of what happened.
So I kind of have to agree with Shawna on the state of news reporting. I’ve been saying for a little while now that it actually seems like the news crews are trying to start a new civil war just so they can get better ratings.

Guest
sianmink
1 year 6 months ago

Wilson chased him down the street. I don’t think we know how close he was when he turned around and charged. I don’t have the patience to dig through all the evidence docs.

Guest
Shawna
1 year 6 months ago

He probably chased him because at that point he was a criminal who was trying to get away. Because it’s kind of a cop’s job to stop that from happening.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

He was a WOUNDED criminal trying to get away. I think that’s two imperatives for Law Enforcement. 1) to render aid and 2) to control the criminal.

Guest
av willis
1 year 6 months ago

And that’s another problem with the whole idea of just “shooting them in the leg”, you’re expected to treat someone who only moments before was trying to kill you, and expecting the shock and/or pain of getting shot to subdue them. So really, the whole notion is a less effective, more dangerous way of pain compliance, something that an officer can accomplish with less risky, (although as noted not infallible, ) tools.

Guest
Tarl
1 year 5 months ago

He was a WOUNDED criminal trying to get away. I think that’s two imperatives for Law Enforcement. 1) to render aid and 2) to control the criminal.

Also,

3) FINISH HIM!

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

An often quoted statistic (allegedly from FBI studies) is that trained police and military personnel miss 70-75% of the time at close range. Criminals tend to fare even worse.

Guest
dgarsys
1 year 6 months ago

Thank you Larry for your insight on this.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

The shooting that most people are talking about today is that of Micheal Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; I’m assuming that’s what prompted this blog post. Your advice to people regarding the law on use of deadly force seems sound. And there are certainly people making any number of ignorant statements about the subject over the past few days.

But the problem Ferguson is a total breakdown of trust. Based on what I’ve seen and read, both from traditional and non-traditional sources, neither the police, the prosecutors, the local politicians, or the news media are in any way trustworthy. And as a result you’ve got a large mass of people there who see the police as simply the largest and best armed gang in the city.

This is a classic rule of law breakdown. And it starts at the top—with an entire political class from President down to Prosecutors who think they are above the rule of law. Our country seems to reward lawbreakers among the elites with wealth and power. If I were a young black person in Ferguson, I’d be wondering why bother following the law. It is to their immense credit that the vast majority of the protesters and citizens there are relatively peaceful, and still seem to be willing to work within the political process.

But the protesters might do well to need to take advice from the Huey P. Newton Gun Club here in Dallas, and organize some black open carry marches and rallies. Show the politicians that they are not unarmed serfs.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

What breakdown of law? There’s the genius, devotion to evidence, legality, the U.S. Constitution, and equal protection from the literary science fiction and fantasy community:

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 5h 5 hours ago @CBPotts WTF? If he’d been brought up right…a racist cop wouldn’t have shot him? How does that work, exactly?

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 5h 5 hours ago @elonjames @LLikesThings Well, God fucking forbid anybody suggest that white people’s fee-fees aren’t the central issue EVER.

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 5h 5 hours ago @CBPotts I can’t even with this. Darren Wilson is a murderer. A white supremacist nation-state shields him. Brown’s parents? Blameless.

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 5h 5 hours ago @ChesyaBurke @tinytempest Bec. the idea of someone seeking some relief from this horror show of white supremacy is the real problem? Christ.

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 10h 10 hours ago @sparksjls @Karnythia Things I just don’t give a flying fuck about. It hasn’t been hard enough for that killer.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Veronica Schanoes @schanoes · 5h 5 hours ago @CBPotts WTF? If he’d been brought up right…a racist cop wouldn’t have shot him? How does that work, exactly?

You know, even if Darren Wilson was racist (and I don’t have any reason to assume that he was) unless he was also a psychopathic stone-cold killer (“I think I’m gonna shoot me a black boy today, hur-hur-hur, let’s pick one at random — that one’s big …”), being brought up right would still have meant that Michael Brown was very unlikely to have been shot. He wouldn’t have gotten high, robbed a store, or been walking down the middle of the street when Wilson encountered him — and he wouldn’t have tried to resist arrest and attack Wilson.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I’m not sure what fact that some people in the literary science fiction and fantasy community (I’ve never heard of “Veronica Schanoes, so she must be very literary) are being idiots on twitter has to do with my point? Are you saying that she’s an example? Or that I agree with her?

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I’m amused by how consistently SJWs use the term “fee-fees” when referring to my rights as a citizen. That’s no surprise coming from a cult that considers me in privilege debt.

Also, aside from their blatant racism, they seem to have a problem making apt comparisons:

“Steven Gould retweeted Mikki Kendall @Karnythia · Nov 24
Ohio an open carry state, yet twice this year Black people carrrying toys have been shot while white people carrying guns are safe.”

I’m not a gun law expert but I’m pretty sure open carry doesn’t mean waving a gun around.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

“Steven Gould retweeted Mikki Kendall @Karnythia · Nov 24
Ohio an open carry state, yet twice this year Black people carrrying toys have been shot while white people carrying guns are safe.”

“I’m not a gun law expert but I’m pretty sure open carry doesn’t mean waving a gun around.”

Not completely sure which particular instances of people getting shot happened in Ohio, and I don’t got out and actively get the details when I do hear about it, but even “waving a gun around” isn’t necessarily the case. Kids running around at night with realistic toys getting shot are why there are laws that *require* toy guns be bright orange or have a bright orange tip on the barrel. (I don’t know that this is followed with toy guns that are clearly toys or is the case in all states.) It’s hardly new, however, that there are tragic accidents involving toys.

We used to have an air-soft arsenal and believe me, there was never a thought of, “Oh, I’m really super white so I totally don’t have to worry about someone thinking this gun is real and overacting.” And we *did* have neighbors (who happened to be black) call the cops.

The thing is… when it comes to race… that the complete nincompoops who have fainting vapours and call the cops in a panicked emotional fit when they see a gun, do so in a hysteric panicked emotional fits when they see a gun held by a black man in the toy section of a store… AND… they post suggestions that their anti-gun buddies should call the cops when they see someone open-carry.

It’s not carry advocates who pee their pants and call the cops when they see a toy held by a black person. It’s the sorts who feel “unsafe” when someone has a gun printed on a shirt.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Did anyone tell her that Brown called Wilson a “pussy”? That could change the whole case.

Guest

@Mischa – come on now. You know that the feminists will ignore Brown’s sexist ‘pussy’ comment because he’s not a ‘White Hispanic’ like Larry is. It’s one of those things they never wanna admit: that it’s TOTES okay with them that ‘minorities’ are ‘allowed’ to be ‘sexist’ … if they have the proper non-white ahnenpass and goose-step march the way that is approved!

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

You should tell Scalzi about the “pussy” remark. That sort of thing gets him riled up.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

“You’re too much of a pussy to shoot me …” Those are hilarious last words, and part of the reason I think Michael Brown was severely stupid. You do not want to give someone holding a gun on you, who you have already given good reason to shoot you, more reason to shoot you. Especially when it did nothing to improve his tactical situation.

Guest
junior
1 year 6 months ago

Brown was high at the time. The toxicology report shows what was almost certainly marijuana in his system. Ergo, it wasn’t necessarily stupidity talking at the time (though it might have been that too). Instead, he was under the influence.

Guest
BobtheRegisterredFool
1 year 6 months ago

Pot impairs risk assessment. This is entirely consistent with the rest of the mess.

I’d also suggest that there is a wider issue of pot consumers. They think they are fine, so they won’t hear about anyone under the influence of pot not being fine. They are afraid to allow the rest of us to think ‘Brown and Martin had the stuff in their system. We could assume they took some unnecessary risks and got themselves killed while waiting for the investigation to clarify matters.’ So far as they can control things, they won’t let it be discussed.

Obama appears to have been genuinely distressed over Brown and Martin. Could his own heavy consumption of pot play a role?

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Weed doesn’t work like that. Even if you’re fairly blitzed, if something fairly traumatic happens you snap straight pretty quickly. It’s a delicate buzz and doesn’t impair you like alcohol. I’ve never seen anyone staggering around on weed or not knowing where they were.

Guest
Professor Badness
1 year 5 months ago

I have known guys on weed that were totally blitzed out of their heads. While they did know where they were, they also kept asking the same question every five-ten minutes for more than an hour.
I assume they could walk straight as they had gotten to class under their own power.

Guest
Ascher Goodrich
1 year 6 months ago

Breakdown of trust? If the government in Ferguson is corrupt, then the people of Ferguson need to run for office and change things. Not form mobs and riot.

Guest

Running for office and actually changing things requires long term effort with no ‘personal’ gains and no guarantee of kudos. Rioting is more ‘fun’. /shakes head

Guest
Ascher Goodrich
1 year 6 months ago

I guess your right. Why run for office when you can just make a stupid tweet and burn down someone’s lively-hood. Something like twenty commercial buildings were burnt down and they still get called peaceful protests.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I think it’s important to remember that the terms “Riot” has largely come to mean “Any protest the Media don’t approve of”. The Kent State “Protests” involved millions of dollars of property damage, including an attempt to burn down a building. I haven’t seen specific charges of looting against Kent State participants, but it’s hard to see a moral difference between deliberate property damage and theft.

I must say, though, that I’d be a lot happier with the original shooting if the cops in the area had refrained from doing stupid crap like ignoring a court order to not harass reporters.

(http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/23/journalist-arrested-ferguson-st-louis)

Guest

I highly recommend reading Cedar’s post on this, and Dr. Pournelle’s. I’ll link Cedar’s as she links to Dr. Pournelle’s.

http://cedarwrites.com/2014/11/26/ferguson/

Civilizing Barbarians is especially eyebrow-raising, in Spockian “Fascinating” manner, especially after I’d read how the LA Times had actively worked against the enforcement of law in a certain area, despite citizens requesting for the intervention. It made me wonder, ‘Why do they WANT that place to be a festering shithole of crime?’

Guest
Ascher Goodrich
1 year 6 months ago

cspschofield, you might be right about the police making mistakes, but it is hard to blame them considering the situation. Reporters are basically doing everything in their power to cause trouble and are just as responsible for the situation as Mike Brown.

Guest
Wes S.
1 year 5 months ago

“Do they want that place to be a festering shithole of crime?”

Short answer, Shadowdancer: Yes. If nothing else, it’s easier to keep their pet proles in their place that way, voting for the “right” people in hopes that they’ll “fix” things.

And it’s a model they’ve replicated all over the nation.

Dr. Pournelle is dead right about what the purpose of the schools should be. The problem is, the leftists who dominate our ruling class don’t want civilized and free-thinking citizens, they want groups of impoverished savages penned up on reservations, dependent on government largesse for their daily survival…and played off against one another in pursuit of political power.

Look, Leftists HATE Western Civilization and the American cultural melting pot with a white-hot passion. We see it every day in how the SJWs constantly run down, debase and trash the art, history, culture and traditions that made us what we are.

And they just LOVE themselves aborigines and savages of all stripes, because they seem to think Primitive Man is somehow “nobler” or “purer” than his civilized counterpart. Excepting their own noble selves, of course, who care so much about the poor and downtrodden that they want to make even more of them to care for.

And if anybody wants to leave their reservation, well, they can always provoke a different batch of savages to terrify them and put them back in their place. (I suspect the people organizing the nationwide Ferguson riots – I think “Obama riots” are a better description – have done so to intimidate the middle class.)

Or, failing that, they can always break out whatever the modern equivalent of smallpox-infested blankets are….

Guest

@Wes. S:

You said Look, Leftists HATE Western Civilization and the American cultural melting pot with a white-hot passion. We see it every day in how the SJWs constantly run down, debase and trash the art, history, culture and traditions that made us what we are.

And they just LOVE themselves aborigines and savages of all stripes, because they seem to think Primitive Man is somehow “nobler” or “purer” than his civilized counterpart. Excepting their own noble selves, of course, who care so much about the poor and downtrodden that they want to make even more of them to care for.

This stood out to me. That explains quite a bit why Clamps is very desperate to paint me as a self-hating racist over on Julie Frost’s LJ (as well as paint Larry as a close-minded jerkass who bans people just coz.)

I firmly believe that the race mentality is a hobble for the spirit and the mind. The color of your skin or your ethnicity does not determine what you can achieve. I think it’s one’s skills, will, talent, willingness to learn and work hard, and be adaptive that determines that, along with a willingness to accept one’s limitations, physical or otherwise, with grace. But in order for those things to be given the freedom to grow, local cultures and mindsets must allow for the acceptance of such self determination.

Dr. Pournelle is dead right about what the purpose of the schools should be. The problem is, the leftists who dominate our ruling class don’t want civilized and free-thinking citizens, they want groups of impoverished savages penned up on reservations, dependent on government largesse for their daily survival…and played off against one another in pursuit of political power.

Yes. This is why they don’t want any of us to be critical of ‘other cultures’, conflating it, wrongly, with race, and racism. They conflate the criticism of culture to criticism of racial groups, which is a trick they use to shut down any attempt to encourage improvement or growth of those cultures to independence and self determination.

Clamps tries to paint me as racist because I am critical of cultures that actively shame attempts to break out of the mental cage that those cultures have put themselves in. Ghetto culture, for example – regardless of being black or Hispanic- actively decries and goes against people who try educating themselves to work for a better future for themselves. They have terms for it – ‘Uncle Tomming’ or “oreo’ or ‘acting white’, which is greatly illustrative of how they hobble themselves with the rejection of what is actually available to all – especially in the West – by deriding it as ‘white privilege.’ It is the ghetto culture that derides education

Examined, this makes no sense, but that’s entirely why the Left operates entirely on Feels~!!!!!!!!! Not logic and reason.

Guest
Wes S.
1 year 5 months ago

Clamps is a feces-flinging monkey. Which actually makes him the perfect metaphor for the Left: Trashing beauty they can’t possibly understand, because they’ve devolved past the point of being able to appreciate it.

And the same might as well be true of the Jemisins, Damiens and Scalzis of the world as well, even if they haven’t quite gone all the way down that path yet…

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I am not trying to imply anything about Ferguson, and its area and demographics. I am trying to imply something about cultures. Some people in this country can’t participate in an open-carry march, because they aren’t supposed to have a firearm in their possession, according to the law. I don’t necessarily think that an “open-carry march” would fit in well with thug life…..
Just a thought!

Guest
Insectress
1 year 6 months ago

Thank you for the explanation, I was always curious about that.

I have to do more research into the times, but it seems like every 20 years riots like this seem to happen.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Excellent post, Larry. Some much-needed sanity on a day when everybody (in the media) seem to be running around ripping their hair out.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Thanks for the post Larry. For what it’s worth, what you’ve written jibes with what I’ve been taught here in New Mexico, in some cases word for word (Ability, Opportunity, Immediate Threat or Intent). I’ve bookmarked this essay in part to save me a lot of talking when the subject inevitably comes up again.

Gotta go get ready for weekly Choir Practice with our instructor and group of shooters. We normally meet on Thursdays, but don’t want to compete with all the rabid holiday shoppers this week and so are shooting on Tuesday instead. And there’s a Sheriff’s Deputy in our group, so at least one LEO in the state is training regularly (he’s a damn good shot, too).

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Reblogged this on mishaburnett and commented:
A discussion of deadly force and the law that is well worth reading.

Guest

[…] Larry Correia discusses use of force. […]

Guest
NTNR
1 year 6 months ago

Great post Larry. I’m sending this to as many people as possible.

Guest
Cadeyrn
1 year 6 months ago

Having said all of that, grabbing at an officer’s gun and punching him in the face is usually going to end poorly.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

As someone who’s been on both the listening and speaking end of the use of force lecture more times than I can count, nice summary.

Guest

Great post. Succinct and to the point, and nothing but the facts.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I don’t see the part where it’s acceptable to loot and riot despite having no direct involvement in the situation or how said looting and rioting will improve anything. Just saying.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Reblogged this on my LJ, and now Clamps is stalking me–just like I figured he would.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

LOL!!! It’s Yama! Hey, maybe Yama should go to Ferguson and fight for power to the people! Yama Moron Mark Crusader Police Shooting Victim, Yay!

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I had previously posted on the Ferguson riots, “Morons Riot in Ferguson to Defend Rights of Stupid Big People to Beat Up, Rob Smaller People.” I was surprised at how popular that post became!

http://jordan179.livejournal.com/306459.html

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Remember that Clamps is the one who said that “antifeminism should be raped with a chainsaw.”

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Forgot that it put a (figuratively) in the middle of that, as if that makes it okay.

Guest

I’m fairly sure that he doesn’t use figuratively the way we do. Because he doesn’t use the English language the way anyone with a working brain cell does.

Y’know, with actual definitions, grammar structure, logic, sentence structure, and coherence… never mind proper use of punctuation…

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

I expect a whole bunch of people the next few days will be puzzled as to why some guy they’ve never heard of is complaining about Larry Correia in their comments.

Guest
Radioactive
1 year 6 months ago

Is that some sort of wierd transference fantasy???

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

Believe me, I don’t want to know any of Clamps’ fantasies.

Guest

@Christopher M Chupik

I’ve had a few unfortunate glimpses into the festering disease he calls a mind over the course of his years of stalking me, and his mental furniture is quite sick and disgusting, and reveals quite a bit of what he considers acceptable to do to those he considers less than human. ‘Raped with a chainsaw’ is not a metaphor with him.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

Gah. 🙁

Guest

My sympathies. Love your “Write, Damnit!” icon.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

Hopefully you can Clamp down on him.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Beating him like a rented mule is more fun. :p Thanks for the heads-up on his Twitter handle. If he gets out of hand or abusive, I have a Ban Button handy.

Guest
snelson134
1 year 6 months ago

You can’t clamp down on slime.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

People (“people”) like Clamps are what Troll Bars are for.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

BTW, Julie, his Twitter name is “Pure, Impure”, so if you start getting harrassed by someone with that name . . . well, you know.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Link? I’m on LJ. I wanna see the carnage.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago
Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Hehe, this has been great fun. Larry should see this.

Guest

I see he’s suddenly active again. Who has the tetsubo? Do we have one we can lend to Julie? =)

Guest

@Dr. Mauser – I see he’s gone and fled since I updated my sticky to prove that actually, he regularly visits my Deviantart and Livejournal BOTH, not just my LJ to see what ‘new things’ I add to my sticky post. I don’t cite the sticky on my Devart frontpage so there should be ‘no reason’ for Clamps to gaze at artwork he claims to find distasteful to him.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

It could just be bedtime.

At first I thought he’d already given up, but it was because he was replying to other people in the threads instead of me.

Guest

Prolly. I think it was pretty late over in the US hours before then.

Guest

Oh, and while it’s somewhat OT to the original post, I figure this is not out of place for the blog.

http://jollyjack.deviantart.com/art/I-Just-Can-t-Look-Away-495901497

Jolly Jack’s response is UTTERLY TRUE and the representation of the OH SO OFFENDED PEOPLE!!!11 HILARIOUS TO BOOT.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

Clamps, like Damien G Walter, is dumb enough to admit to wrongdoing online. That is weapons grade stupidity.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Oh, at one point he drags you into it over something unrelated, which is typical of his derail when losing tactic. Which means he tries to change the subject every post.

Guest

@Christopher Chupik You get an especial mention as someone crampsy pantsy says stalks him. Much Q_Qing and wailing and handwringing follow, including claims that he’s as innocent and as pure as the driven snow… aaaaaand at the bottom of the threads, he only goes ahead and proves me right. And seems to get upset about my proving him a liar with screenshotted evidence.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I used his DeviantArt numbers against him. He’s really squirming now. He just tried to claim that Jollyjack is untalented.

Guest

I’m laughing a lot, actually. I’m loving that you got him to start making lots of stupid excuses, thereby exposing his lack of skill, even WITH a reference photo he claims to use. You know, the kind of whiny excuse that only real poseurs and pretenders do.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

Yike. Guess that was inevitable, sadly.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Oh, you already know. One of the problems of a threading level of 3.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

Also, your posts weren’t showing up earlier.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Holy crap, I think this is the most comments I’ve gotten on an LJ post, ever. The boy does not know when to just shut the hell up and stop when he’s been demolished time and again. It’s like a fetish with him.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

He likes that attention. He did it until he went to bed, and started right back up first thing in the morning.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

Yup. I think he likes his beatings a little too much.

Guest
Patrick Chester
1 year 5 months ago

…its amusing how a snide little weasel like “yama” thinks it can fool people into not seeing what it truly is.

That kind of pest has been around since Usenet, probably earlier than that too.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I especially enjoyed likening him to an inflatable punching clown.

Guest

The funniest thing is, he constantly complains that other artists get attention for their fetishy artwork. And then he says that he doesn’t mind Nebezial/Shiniez’ work.

Sunstone is ALL ABOUT fetishes, people, fetish community, and… two women who fall in love.

Yeah, what was that about fetish stuff? I love how you guys oh so neatly expose his abject hypocrisy. *clapping!*

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I’m saving that one, I bet he doesn’t even know they’re the same.

Guest

*howling with laughter*

MORE proof of hypocrisy!

http://agilebrit.livejournal.com/1067968.html?thread=3856064#t3856064

“You’re passing judgement on my work without looking at them.”

The same guy who says he won’t read a poem but will happily pass judgement on it, is upset that someone else will do the same thing. OH MY GODS we need a LMFAO icon!

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

For a moment, I thought he had gone away, but then I looked and realized it was because he was replying to you and Tom.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I frankly love having the chance to throw off stuff like this: “Oh, and this reply is another non-sequitur. You wrote three lines about me. But the topic is why you suck. Please try to stay on topic. “

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

I love how Mauser nails him for his one-sentence reply and Clamps responds with . . . a one-sentence reply!

Guest

@Christopher Yeah, and it’s funny that he’s making himself even more of a massive hypocrite with every single demand he makes from everyone there – including the owner of the blog. It’s like an implicit threat of punishing people with his presence. “If you wanted to keep undesirables from reading posts, you’d make them private. ”

In other words ‘nobody is allowed to make public posts if they don’t want me to ever harass them for their opinions because they shouldn’t make their ideas known.’

I’m kinda tickled that he calls himself an undesirable. Hilarious!

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Heh, I missed that implication, but I did suggest that he’d be banned from the entire internet that way.

The most fun is watching how hard he tries to squirm away if you DON’T follow his attempts at deflection and repeat your question. He just tried to introduce N.K. Jemison to the discussion. Denied.

Guest

LOL.

I pointed out that to make his art look good, he posts the whole thing with deviantart page and artist comments.

He digs through my practice art, gets the image only link, and posts it there, so any viewer doesn’t see the artist commentary where I explictly state ‘this was a practice / study/ etc’ and the viewer is falsely lead to believe these are the best pieces I do. The thing he bitches about as mac and cheese? Is the first ever attempt I did at atmospheric landscape painting. I don’t PRETEND it’s awesome. I talk about how much I learned DOING it.

So yeah, he likes to put things completely out of context in attempts to make me look bad. And him whining about my post is funnier and even more like a predator screaming “MY VICTIM WHO I SLANDER EVERYWHERE IS NOT LYING THERE AND TAKING IT THUS SHE IS STALKING ME AND DESERVES WHAT I DO!!!”

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Kinda like how he takes one clunker of a sentence out of Vox’s writing, and acts as if it’s indicative of the whole thing.

Guest

Yeah. It’s hilarious how he’s now bitching about ‘ultrarealism’ and how ‘you’ are getting hung up on details… but bitches endlessly about the details on my art.

And bitches about the first attempts as if it were the ONLY LANDSCAPE I EVER DID.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Oooh, I shoulda used that.Ultrarealism and his complaint about your commission pic. Saving that for the next round.

We’re gonna break LJ at this level of nesting soon.

Guest

He just replied to you, bitching about Digital Secretary Sophie again, and a ‘fixation about breasts and loins’.

So he just handed you your opportunity on a silver platter.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I know, I was just about to say that! I think I hit that slow ball right out of the park.

Guest

*realization:* Actually, doesn’t that mean he deliberately draws his ‘women’… things… that way? Warped?

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I dunno.

I think we should probably stop discussing it over here though. Larry’s post is actually about a rather serious issue, and as much fun as it is butchering Clammy over his idiocy, this probably isn’t the place for a play-by-play.

Guest

That’s true.

I’m getting lots of material to keep supporting the sticky too. It’s… impressive, kinda like watching someone trying to walk through a minefield and stepping on every single one like a Wile E Coyote cartoon.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

@Shadowdancer – I love how well you nailed him over there. He doesn’t try to deny that he did something creepy and inappropriate, he brags about it. And then whines that he got caught. In this case, purely by chance. I googled “Larry Correia” and “past week” and found him. I couldn’t believe it.

Guest

@Christopher Thanks. Mauser and I have been taking his words and turning them against him. He fled this particular subthread after I mentioned that I updated it, and after I said I updated the sections that prove with screenshots that he still went after me even when I’d pretty much vanished into a videogame for a year or more.

http://agilebrit.livejournal.com/1067968.html?thread=3876800#t3876800

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

It’s… impressive, kinda like watching someone trying to walk through a minefield and stepping on every single one like a Wile E Coyote cartoon.

YAMA: Why do I spend so much time and effort stalking Shadowdancer? I’m glad you asked. (*pulls roll-down wall chart with picture of Rory as Drow*) You see, every part of the the Shadowdancer is delicious and edible, and each a different flavor. The head tastes like strawberries, the hair is cotton candy, the chest chocolate creme de leche, and the arms like lobster …

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

You know… THAT particular argument sounds rather…*schlurp*… persuasive.”

Guest
David MacKinnon
1 year 5 months ago

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick!
Had nothing else going on so I waded thru that lake-o-filth. Respect, lil Drow, respect. You done landed a psycho.
You know, this years long experience could just be fodder for a really good cyber crime novel. Just how much sweet revenge would a top NYT best seller be? On a total Brain floss side note; I caught the South Park 3 part Black Friday / GOT episodes. Reading Yama / Clamps obsession with male “junk” in art, I had that “weiner, weiner…weiner, weiner” parody of the GOT theme running thru my mind the entire time. EEEWWW!
Your resilience in the face of “madness is a tar baby for punishment” does you credit, and I love a woman with backbone.

Guest

@ Jordan179 and Dr. Mauser: O_O;;;;;;;;;; I am not a snac- *pauses as hubby points out I come in fun size, with a grin* … *grumble*

@ David MacKinnon – Why thank you, kind sir, for such a compliment. *bow*

The idea might work as a psychological horror – except I’m actually aware of how inept he is. I’ve seen the work done by people like him, who were actually competent over the years, and are much, much worse than Clamps. I realize I could have it worse. I’ve seen the wreckage they make of lives. Still, it’s a good idea, and I might be able to make use of it.

I’ve been blessed with good friends and a hubby who ‘gets’ this – as well as a very good, very steadfast housemate and honorary family who’s also very tech savvy.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

Holy mother of mercy, he even brings up the goddamn fish semen again! 🙂

Guest

Congratulations for the Clamps-caused story sale ^o^, Julie!

Guest
Christopher M Chupik
1 year 5 months ago

See, he does some good, even if it’s entirely unintentional.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

I am laughing so hard right now. People are reading (and actually enjoying!) my fiction because of him. It’s awesome.

Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Alas, my sales have been as flat as his preferred women.

Guest
jnials
1 year 6 months ago

If you want a summary of various state laws and a great primer on what to do BEFORE you shoot, this book is excellent: http://lawofselfdefense.com/product/the-law-of-self-defense-2nd-edition/

@correia45: Took awhile for my wife to accept carrying a round in the chamber. 95% of it was her confidence with the pistol. As her confidence went up, her reluctance went down.

And yeah, she’s generally a better shot with her gun (Sig P226 in 9mm) than I am with mine (S&W M&P 9mm).

My 15 year old daughter wants my M&P for her shooting practice. She’s a better shot too. 🙁

Best not mess with my girls. 🙂 🙂 🙂

Guest
Khazlek
1 year 6 months ago

Isn’t half the point of the P226 design that it’s evens safer to have a round in the chamber?

I have a related question. Is it a good idea to have a round in the chamber for a gun stored not on your person but with ready access in mind, like in a quick access safe with a push-button combination. It seems like in the event of a fire, it would be bad form to cook off a round into a fireman, If you have to use a few seconds to open the box, does one more hurt to work the slide.

Guest
CMB
1 year 6 months ago

The author of that book, Andrew Blanca, blogs over at Legal Insurrection:
http://legalinsurrection.com/

His commentary on the Zimmerman trial is well worth reading.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Nice job, man! I had been thinking of writing something like this for friends and relatives, and now you’ve saved me the effort (and done a better job than I would have anyway.)

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

“In ten years of studying violent encounters and learning everything I could about every shooting I could, I never once found a newspaper article that got all the facts right.”

In a lifetime of reading newspaper articles about any topic you have personal knowledge of or expertise in, you will never find a newspaper article that gets all the facts right. I’ve never been able to figure out why people complain about “news media bias”: journalists are lazy and clueless so they’re going to be wrong anyway, what difference is bias going to make?

Second topic: isn’t aiming for the center of mass also just part of fundamental firearms safety? I’m thinking in terms of “Know your target and what is beyond.”

Guest
Alpheus
1 year 6 months ago

The bias still comes into play for several reasons: First, people still tend to believe somewhat what they get from the news; second, even if the media isn’t getting their facts straight, they are still picking and choosing what stories to make their mistakes in (and to some extent, they are probably even choosing what mistakes to make); third, when it involves Republicans and conservatives, they do funny things (such as identify Senator Doofus (R) as a Republican, but ignore the party of Senator Evil in the exact same scandal); I’m sure there are other ways where this bias becomes annoying.

(One specific way that comes to mind is the willingness to bring up debunked anti-gun studies over and over again, as if they are certified solid fact.)

Perhaps the most annoying thing is that Republicans haven’t yet figured out how to neutralize this bias. A couple of people have the knack of doing so (Reagan comes to mind), but until it can become systematic, it’s going to be a thorn on the side of those to whom the media is biased against…

Guest
Alpheus
1 year 6 months ago

On your second topic: yes, you are right: aiming for center of mass is practicing “Know your target and what is beyond”. 🙂

Guest
Pete Sheppard
1 year 6 months ago

Good one, Larry. One thing to remember is that for private citizens, ‘No Bill’ or ‘Not Guilty’ may just be the beginning. There may well be civil proceedings by the shootee’s family, which can drag on for years, and consume everything you’ve built up over a lifetime, not to mention your physical and mental health. “Every bullet has a lawyer attached”
This doesn’t mean just submit, but by being aware ahead of time, you can be as clear-minded as possible if That Time ever comes.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Great info! I learned a bit here, and I am thankful to you, OP. Also, I would like to point out, in general, that I am confident the grand jury in the Brown case could have gone either way, and there would have been just as much rioting. Celebration riots are pretty crazy, too!

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

One of the many things that enrages me about the Ferguson situation are the agitators who swoop in, make a problem worse, then leave, never having to live with the consequences of the hatred they incited. And what really maddens me is that fact that these same people who do this are always the first to piously exclaim: “Violence never solved anything!”

Guest
RandyGC
1 year 6 months ago

Well, you got to admit, their violence has never solved anything!

Guest
David MacKinnon
1 year 6 months ago

New industry, Race Riot Tourism.

Guest

Does nothing for the locals or the local industries. Well, nothing positive, anyway.

Guest
Christopher M. Chupik
1 year 6 months ago

Well, that sounds exactly like the industries they want to promote.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Niven wrote about it a while back. “The Last Days of the Permanent Floating Riot Club”. They used teleportation booths rather than cell phones, but the idea was the same.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I recall reading in the first round of riots, the police were arresting people from as far away and New York and L.A.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Ferguson’s stores have been devastated by the riots. Many of them won’t be opening their doors again. The fact that the locals either rioted or did nothing to resist the rioters (it’s an urban area, they’re armed, if they were resisting the rioters the hospital should have been crowded with dead and dying rioters shot from the surrounding homes and businesses) pretty much ensures that no sane financial institution will invest in businesses there for quite a while to come.

The mostly rich riot tourists will happily go on to some other place to have their fun, or graduate college or grad school to take high-paying jobs. The locals, who were foolish enough not to grasp what was going to happen to them, are going to have to live in that neighborhood.

Maybe the next bunch of left-wingers will go to Ferguson, note that it’s “under-served” by business, and blame “racism.”

Happened in Jersey City and Newark. When I was a young man (1980’s) they still hadn’t recovered from the riots of 1968.

Guest
BobtheRegisterredFool
1 year 6 months ago

People bitch about the KKK.

The KKK is crippled in at least three ways:
1. Since the Democratic Parties abandoned them, they haven’t much to offer in the way of deals.
2. The KKK cannot compromise enough to form a coalition that could make up the shortage in numbers.
3. The KKK stinks of losers, which is fatal in the American culture.

The Obama administration and its private citizen colleagues have done substantially more to advance the cause of the KKK than the KKK has in the same amount of time. Obama et al, are much more effective than the KKK at the KKK’s purported specialty.

It seems likely that eight years of the Obama administration will do more than forty years of KKK. I only refrain from a higher multiplier because longer periods of time make stable statements of an organization’s effectiveness problematic.

Our legal systems depends on consensus.

There are a number of alternatives that do not have the same needs.

I am certain that those Americans who disagree with me, and I would find these more unpleasant.

Guest
Wes S.
1 year 6 months ago

There’s also (4): If you took all the informants and undercover cops out of the KKK, it’d lose at least half of its dwindling membership.

*shrug*

If the wheels come off and the Sharptons and Obamas get their apparent wish for a race war, I doubt you’ll see the KKK be any kind of a factor, anyway. OTOH, I’m thinking you’ll see a lot of payback being dished out by “lone wolves,” impromptu neighborhood militias, and – especially if the leftist fad for targeting the families of police officers takes hold, as has been threatened to the Ferguson officers – the rapid rise of American death squads.

You might want to search out Matt Bracken’s essay “When the Music Stops” for a preview of coming attractions…

Guest
snelson134
1 year 6 months ago

In my field, we call them “seagull consultants”: swoop in, sh*t on everything, steal the fish, and leave.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Reblogged this on Writing and other stuff.

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

Speaking of giving free gun classes to journalists and them never taking the opportunity. Do you know who would *love* it? Romance writers. (Consider that these are the people who take field trips to morgues.) It’s sort of a round-about way to get good information out to people, but I bet there *would* be takers, and that a lot of those would be people who never touched a gun before and would be of an anti-gun mindset, if one were to ask them about it.

And they do write, and they do reach a large audience.

Guest

*blink*

Field trips to morgues?! Romance writers? Why?! *blinkblinkblinkblink, jaw drop*

Guest
1 year 6 months ago

I didn’t misspell morgue, did I? No, seriously. Romance writers often write romance mystery or romance police-procedural, etc. What do you do when your hero is a cop or your heroine is solving a murder but you don’t actually know anything about police work or what happens to corpses? The most fun research field trips are doing things like traveling to Scotland, of course!, but I’ve also heard of morgue trips and info-things with the police. And lots of romance books have people in them who shoot guns for whatever reason. Present this as a writing research to the local RWA chapter, and I know there would be takers who’d be interested in just really basic experience for description even just what a pistol feels like to hold, and what does the “kick” feel like.

Guest

Ahhh, that makes more sense. Okay, that makes a lot more sense. I’ll cheerfully admit that the romances I tend to read really fall into the ‘falls for a rich guy’ uberfantasies, because it lets me chuck reality out the window for an hour or so. (Plus the author whose work I like focuses more on the characters as people than the business aspect of the whole thing.)

There have been a couple I picked up where the love interest is a doctor, just for a change of pace, and I keep wanting to strangle the protagonists. Then there was this one that came as part of a bundle, where the heroine was a drifty ‘I’d rather do art with the aborigines, but my grandfather decreed I would inherit his billionaire’s empire’ and somehow magically she’s capable of running a multifocus corporation… I think Rhys found my spluttering more amusing than the idiotic portrayal of Australians in the book. (It also took flying lessons, and a three point shot into the bin of my hospital room.)

Guest

Also, no you didn’t misspell morgue.