It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: deadeyedick
Threatening? Really. Ill cut you some slack here because you dont read these things, I see. You should before you look worse than you do now. It is the logic of firearm instruction classes.
By more than a few of us, the training we received, and by those who know.
Ill give them your address. Youll have aprox 0.5 seconds to make your point.
Again...in case youre arent reading this all the way through either...its taught in FIREARMS INSTRUCTIONS..give or take a few seconds and ft.
No more threats please. Its foolishness and silly on your part.
Respectfully speaking.
originally posted by: Grovit
'you' are the one using the distance of 25 feet as fact even though it is an approximate
'you' are the one that decided how long it takes to say what 'you' say wilson said
'you' are the one that brought kenyan distance runners into this discussion
'i' am amused by 'you'
GRAND JUROR: I know we've heard evidence that Michael Brown after he turned around and advanced back towards Officer Wilson, and we have our diagram of the crime scene with the measurements on it and I just want to make sure I'm interpreting all of this right. So as far as physical evidence, we have the blood on the ground that was about 21 or 22 feet from where Michael Brown ended up. So we know for a fact that's a minimum distance he might have advanced and from eyewitness testimony that placed him at the corner of Coppercreek, that dimension looks like it is closer to 48 to 50 feet; is that correct? So that would be like an outer --
Witness: I'm going to look at this diagram also just so I'm sure we are on the same page here. this. So you're saying, obviously, would be zero right here, right.
GRAND JUROR: The distance was 48 feet
Witness: Correct, yes, sir. So we would say, and you made reference to the blood on the ground. So from this point here, the red stains in the roadway are identified what was later determined to be Michael Brown's blood as Items 19 and 20 on the key for the diagram. So Items 19 and 20, so the zero is here, identified as being 31 feet and 26 feet 7 inches, and this direction here, and then you're correct in saying if we continue to move west on Canfield Drive, Michael Brown's left foot and right foot for that matter are, 48 feet 2 inches, yes, sir.
GRAND JUROR: If I did the calculation that was 21 and a half feet?
Witness: Yes, sir.
GRAND JUROR: Physical evidence, eyewitness reports would have doubled that.
Witness: 21, 22 feet between the blood and where Michael Brown's body was when we arrived, yes.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick
Make up your mind. First you said he was hiding behind a tree. Now you say he was behind a car. Pick a made up story and stick with it please.
Again, once the initial confrontation took place Wilson never saw the other subject again. And at no point was Brown ever 100 feet away from Wilson. Now you're implying that Brown ran nearly 150 feet away and that Wilson was 100 feet away from him and somehow closed that gap down to 10-20 feet in the time it took Brown to turn around and start moving back towards Wilson, and THEN Wilson reversed direction and backed up 10-20 feet. Wilson must be a track star in your mind.
originally posted by: deadeyedick
. i will stand by it. knife vs gun the winner depends on the mindset. .5 sec is .3 more than it would take if one has the weapon of choice and holster of choice. .
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick
Nope nope nope. The current world records for fastest draw and fire are somewhere between .219 and .404, depending on the event type. Again, spouting off "facts" with no proof or evidence.
originally posted by: deadeyedick
originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: deadeyedick
One man has a knife and is 20 ft in front of a man with a gun. The one with the knife starts to come at the other quickly.
Who wins? Gun or knife?
Knife does....because in 3-4 secs he will reach the gun holder before he can draw and fire.
Knives wielding threat will travel 20ft quicker every time.
Learned that in 3 (three) sep. Firearms training classes
So...your proof...isn't.
i will give you my address if you ever want a real life demo of your flawed logic
originally posted by: loveguy
wilson had ample opportunity (split-second decision?) to engage the guy utilizing less lethal means; a tazer would do, but he chose to unload his weapon on him instead. endorsed live on tv..."policy is to shoot to kill"?
cant use a tazer if you dont have one. he didnt have one and was not required to have one. thats been stated a bunch of times
He chose a more lethal means against an *unarmed individual* when (he didn't have to), and i'll give a rat's ass if that is why he resigned after not only soiling himself, but the whole department.
If wilson is/was not in the wrong, why did he resign?
originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Phage
the witnesses that said he was shot in the back could have been telling the truth givin that wilsons testimony has now been found to be some what false. there were 6 or so shots that could have been fired whild browns back was turned to wilson but they missed. there was one injury to the arm that could have come from behind or from the front if his arms were elevated. so when you look at it the other way that is another piece that fits.
their is enough evidence to return a true bill but was ignored.
25' 9 seconds and charging does not fit.
you can not just dismiss these facts just because you do not like what they point to.
originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: deadeyedick
Given all the potential factors...you just admitted you can't accept that. Oh...and my classes were not for purchasers...it was advanced law enforcement and military based suppositional training about understaning potentially misunderstood situations.
Just because youve said you cant accept it, doesnt mean its not true. Nor that it IS true.
These Range Instructors-instructional training points were well taken for this "what-if"?. And according to a few other members, they were also made aware of the same outcome for the premise presented.
Maybe we could send an instructor over to your place so you can correct them? I mean...given all the potential variables n all...???
originally posted by: deadeyedick
originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: deadeyedick
Given all the potential factors...you just admitted you can't accept that. Oh...and my classes were not for purchasers...it was advanced law enforcement and military based suppositional training about understaning potentially misunderstood situations.
Just because youve said you cant accept it, doesnt mean its not true. Nor that it IS true.
These Range Instructors-instructional training points were well taken for this "what-if"?. And according to a few other members, they were also made aware of the same outcome for the premise presented.
Maybe we could send an instructor over to your place so you can correct them? I mean...given all the potential variables n all...???
Nobody i know round here would even wait for the knife to be drawn. The lesson would be cut short. That was the just of my response that if i came to your house with a knife i would likely get shot and the other way around.
It is true both ways that we are limited by our training. think deep about that one
putting that aside it still shows that wilson was off with his remarks about distance and actions. The comment may have been aimed at showing what one could do in 25' but it only shows that all the things brown said happened in that time could not fit in the time and distance aspects of his statments.