Anybody remember the DHS ordering 1.6 billion or so rounds of ammunition ( hollow point) back in Feb

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
It's illegal to shoot an ejecting pilot, not a paratrooper.

Your source for that claim is what?

The Geneva Convention. Of 1949 I think.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
It's illegal to shoot an unarmed combatant according to both the Geneva Conventions and the UCMJ.

Pilots are armed with a pistol....

No, the pistol is in the seat pack, along with other items like first aid kit and compass. I used to be an F-16 crew chief. The pilot cannot access it's contents until on the ground and unbuckled from the pouch. When he is falling under parachute he is unarmed.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
It's illegal to shoot an ejecting pilot, not a paratrooper.

Your source for that claim is what?

The Geneva Convention. Of 1949 I think.

Yes, and UCMJ.

originally posted by: freedom7
Hey Not urTypical, I wouldn't deny what youre saying and what you saw.

But please tell me. Do you think deep within the FEMA camps there are things the public has no access to that would reveal these detention centers are not what you think?

Do you trust they really do exist to prepare for an insidious agenda of Martial Law?

I can't speak for what is at any of the other camps, I only drove to the Beech Grove, Indiana site. It's roughly 2 miles from my house. It's nothing more than an Amtrak depot.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: freedom7
Hey Not urTypical, I wouldn't deny what youre saying and what you saw.

But please tell me. Do you think deep within the FEMA camps there are things the public has no access to that would reveal these detention centers are not what you think?

Do you trust they really do exist to prepare for an insidious agenda of Martial Law?

I can't speak for what is at any of the other camps, I only drove to the Beech Grove, Indiana site. It's roughly 2 miles from my house. It's nothing more than an Amtrak depot.

Well, I truly do not know if the FEMA camp thing is real or not but I do see where a railroad terminal would be an ideal spot for one, wouldn't you?

originally posted by: CharlesT

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: freedom7
Hey Not urTypical, I wouldn't deny what youre saying and what you saw.

But please tell me. Do you think deep within the FEMA camps there are things the public has no access to that would reveal these detention centers are not what you think?

Do you trust they really do exist to prepare for an insidious agenda of Martial Law?

I can't speak for what is at any of the other camps, I only drove to the Beech Grove, Indiana site. It's roughly 2 miles from my house. It's nothing more than an Amtrak depot.

Well, I truly do not know if the FEMA camp thing is real or not but I do see where a railroad terminal would be an ideal spot for one, wouldn't you?

I understand that argument, but it's pretty decrepit and run down. And there were no double fence rows like the video said with the barbed wire at the top facing inwards "to keep people in and not for keeping people out". What the video said was there wasn't there.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Soldiering is different from police.One kills only,the other should arrest.
The Govt is not capable of opposing us because of systems and rules ,so they legislate their security. it is aided by fear.




Didn't know civilians require a radio breakdown these days.

a reply to: intrptr

The varience would make NO difference to a trained shooter in a pistol engagement,The rounds are for duty work not training.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

The variance would make NO difference to a trained shooter in a pistol engagement,The rounds are for duty work not training.

Well, okay. Except if cops are banging away at a "suspect' they aren't that well trained.

You was in country I'm sure the difference between suppressing or cover fire and direct fire is something you understand.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: cavtrooper7

The variance would make NO difference to a trained shooter in a pistol engagement,The rounds are for duty work not training.

Well, okay. Except if cops are banging away at a "suspect' they aren't that well trained.

You was in country I'm sure the difference between suppressing or cover fire and direct fire is something you understand.

Depends on the distance to the target, and likewise when the adrenaline is surging through ones veins it's quite different than being calm and shooting at paper targets on the range. Fact.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Depends on the distance to the target, and likewise when the adrenaline is surging through ones veins it's quite different than being calm and shooting at paper targets on the range. Fact.

"Training" for actual duty is a lot different than "punching paper holes" on the range.

The "I lost it" excuse is just that. If true, they shouldn't be cops. And if not… they shouldn't be cops.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Depends on the distance to the target, and likewise when the adrenaline is surging through ones veins it's quite different than being calm and shooting at paper targets on the range. Fact.

"Training" for actual duty is a lot different than "punching paper holes" on the range.

The "I lost it" excuse is just that. If true, they shouldn't be cops. And if not… they shouldn't be cops.

It's pretty apparent you don't have the slightest clue about police or FBI training. They do certain tasks to get their blood pressure and heart rate up and then shoot to try and simulate the effects of the adrenaline surge. It's a matter of life or death when engaged in an actual firefight. According to FBI statistics 40% of all officer shot and killed in the line of duty were shot AFTER putting at least one bullet into their suspect/target. And the FBI only keeps statistics on officers who die, not on the ones who were shot and lived.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

It's a matter of life or death when engaged in an actual firefight.

What "firefight"?

"Civil servants" hardly get into those. Its mostly one sided. Like your replies.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: NOTurTypical

It's a matter of life or death when engaged in an actual firefight.

What "firefight"?

"Civil servants" hardly get into those. Its mostly one sided. Like your replies.

Check the FBI statistics. As was pointed out just above 40% of all LE officers killed in the line of duty were shot AFTER hitting their target suspect at least once with a bullet. When two people are shooting at one another that is a "firefight". And the FBI does not keep statistics where the officer was shot and lived. That is why when a cop shoots he doesn't stop until the threat is COMPLETELY neutralized. It's a matter of life and death for them.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

That is why when a cop shoots he doesn't stop until the threat is COMPLETELY neutralized. It's a matter of life and death for them.

Well. according to witness 41 it was.

Over kill is just that. Making sure they are dead. 'That ought to be easier with a billion hollow points, you think?

I got better things to do than chant statistics. Like you said, its the heat of their moment of glory, it all gets blurry, Boo hoo.

Intrptr out.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

The point is for a soldier DEATH is the objective or surrender,it's a completely different MINDSET compared to law enforcement.
THEY have rules ,protocols and leadrship that make our military ROES look like a free fire zone.

a reply to: intrptr

Well. according to witness 41 it was.

Yes, one witness out of over 90 called to testify. *golf clap* Use the extreme exception to define the rule much? That's a fallacy of logic.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: NOTurTypical

The point is for a soldier DEATH is the objective or surrender,it's a completely different MINDSET compared to law enforcement.
THEY have rules ,protocols and leadrship that make our military ROES look like a free fire zone.

I'm a veteran. And throw ROE's out the window when people are trying to kill you or they are an imminent threat. That's basic constitutional self-defense under right to life.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Hardy the objective though is it?

Gotta love the idea of spending that money on bullets to use against the citizens instead of spending the money on the needs of citizens.