Hiker who shot man says he'd do it again: NRA contributed to his self defense

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Well, Steven, you're in luck. He's been known to hold hands with men and prance around gaily in the Chinese countryside. I daresay he'd be more than willing to let you have a grab at him as well.

Oh come on...be fair. If the man makes a legitimate point, give him credit.

[Peikko 1,575]

Worrying about the threat behind every lamppost? Excellent strategy for long life.

Seriously bad for the blood pressure, but no 'pro' will ever catch you with your pants down, no siree bob!

Oh, the entertainment you provide shooter is quite priceless.

I'm still trying to find in what manual it lays out the 'responsible' way to handle a gun while having sex....

To be fair, MC, the gist of what he is saying - being aware of your surroundings is a good idea.

No, he is saying that unless you take 'measures' to protect yourself that include treating everyone in a street as suspicious until they prove themselves innocuous, you deserve what you get up to and including getting shot.

Most people take reasonable measures to protect themselves but they do so based reasonable risk not some imaginary threat that is the same on every street in every town/city.

There are very few areas that I have ever been to that require one to 'scan the eyes' of those amongst whom one is walking in case one inadvertently tempts them to attack you because you aren't looking positive and confident - in fact, I challenge anyone to find such a place anywhere. If you are in a dangerous area, having the air of confidence will not save you from some gang member/terrorist/random nutter who wants what you have. The dude is paranoid, or if not, does a good impersonation of someone who is.

Edited May 18, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Well, Steven, you're in luck. He's been known to hold hands with men and prance around gaily in the Chinese countryside. I daresay he'd be more than willing to let you have a grab at him as well.

Oh come on...be fair. If the man makes a legitimate point, give him credit.

You're wrote that with his ####### in your hand, didn't you? No wonder it took you a while, one-hand typing and all.

There are very few areas that I have ever been to that require one to 'scan the eyes' of those amongst whom one is walking in case one inadvertently tempts them to attack you because you aren't looking positive and confident - in fact, I challenge anyone to find such a place anywhere.

Irvington, NJ.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Worrying about the threat behind every lamppost? Excellent strategy for long life.

Seriously bad for the blood pressure, but no 'pro' will ever catch you with your pants down, no siree bob!

Oh, the entertainment you provide shooter is quite priceless.

I'm still trying to find in what manual it lays out the 'responsible' way to handle a gun while having sex....

To be fair, MC, the gist of what he is saying - being aware of your surroundings is a good idea.

No, he is saying that unless you take 'measures' to protect yourself that include treating everyone in a street as suspicious until they prove themselves innocuous, you deserve what you get up to and including getting shot.

Most people take reasonable measures to protect themselves but they do so based reasonable risk not some imaginary threat that is the same on every street in every town/city.

There are very few areas that I have ever been to that require one to 'scan the eyes' of those amongst whom one is walking in case one inadvertently tempts them to attack you because you aren't looking positive and confident - in fact, I challenge anyone to find such a place anywhere. If you are in a dangerous area, having the air of confidence will not save you from some gang member/terrorist/random nutter who wants what you have. The dude is paranoid, it does a good impersonation of someone who is.

Fair enough...although I think he was exaggerating a bit. It really depends on the situation - whether you are alone, walking down a dark alley vs. walking in broad daylight down a populated street.

I personally do not feel the need to be constantly looking over my shoulder in most situations and I avoid putting myself in situations where I would feel the need to.

[Peikko 1,575]

I didn't say find me a place that is dangerous, I said one where you are safe if you don the air of confidence. I know a few dangerous areas but the danger is the same no matter what air one adopts.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I didn't say find me a place that is dangerous, I said one where you are safe if you don the air of confidence. I know a few dangerous areas but the danger is the same no matter what air one adopts.

Not really. In most gang infested areas, meekness is an invitation. Confidence does work. If the homeboys think you're packing, that works even better.

[Peikko 1,575]

It doesn't work with terrorists, perhaps it does with gang kids. I can't imagine it being worth the experiment though

[rebeccajo 14]

He didn't have to shoot him three times in the chest.

In the legs would have been sufficient.

What I am saying to you is that "looks crazy" doesn't necessarily mean "dangerous".

spoken by someone who knows nothing about the subject, obviously.

About which subject? Guns or mental health?

I don't know a lot about guns, that's true.

I work in the mental health field. Do you have experience in that field?

Now remember, don't answer the question based upon the time you've spent in the home.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I work in the mental health field. Do you have experience in that field?

Now remember, don't answer the question based upon the time you've spent in the home.

He lives in central PA. It's pretty fvdked up out there, so yeah I'd say he does.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't say find me a place that is dangerous, I said one where you are safe if you don the air of confidence. I know a few dangerous areas but the danger is the same no matter what air one adopts.

Not really. In most gang infested areas, meekness is an invitation. Confidence does work. If the homeboys think you're packing, that works even better.

Unless you are unfamiliar with the general area you usually know which places you shouldn't visit. Most times - those aren't the sort of places you'd visit anyway.

Most times - its a non-issue.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I didn't say find me a place that is dangerous, I said one where you are safe if you don the air of confidence. I know a few dangerous areas but the danger is the same no matter what air one adopts.

Not really. In most gang infested areas, meekness is an invitation. Confidence does work. If the homeboys think you're packing, that works even better.

Unless you are unfamiliar with the general area you usually know which places you shouldn't visit. Most times - those aren't the sort of places you'd visit anyway.

Most times - its a non-issue.

I go into the hood with some regularity to get jamaican takeout. That is, if you consider Plainfield's downtown the hood. And I went to Rutgers back when New Brunswick was a lot rougher than it is today. It's my personal opinion that confidence does work.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Downtown Elizabeth was down at the nasty end of the scale for me, though I think that whole general area (and the surrounding towns) have the same issues with gang crime. The residential parts a half mile past the high street are pretty nasty - lots of boarded up homes and people out on their stoops.

Irvington too - drove through there a couple of times and had a not so nice experience with a potential landlord there (this is when we were apartment hunting and didn't really know the area).

Edited May 18, 2009 by Private Pike

[fozzie 41]

on one other occasion i was sitting in a remote county park late in an evening with a woman. some "urban yutes" came strolling by talking big, but didn't notice us in the shadow. they never saw what was in my hand, or in hers...

In that instance why did you feel the need to grasp your weapon (no pun intended)? If they didn't even notice you in the shadows how were they a threat to you or how do you know the would have been a threat if they had seen you? Paranoia? . Many times the mere presence of the gun creates problems that could either be resolved in a non violent manner or would not have happened in the first place.

as i recall, the half dozen or so yutes were taking the short cut up the rail trail from New Freedom Pennsylvania up to the little town of Railroad talking about some "homey" they were on their way to "beat down". something bout "messin' wif my sista ###### muf ucka i moan mess wif his a$$, aight beech!".

this kind of dialect is not often heard in New Freedom, nor it it commonly heard on the rail trail. certainly it is not welcome even on the other side of jail bars from me. perhaps you will be so kind as to let me asses the inherent danger in the situation?

this group of young gentlemen passed within 10 feet of me. if they had known we were there, no telling what could have happened. hence the gun in my hand, rather than SOB. the mere presence of the gun did not create a problem. rather, it guarranteed that if a problem occured, i would be able to deal with said problem effectively. violent or non violent, the outcome was not under my control in that moment, excpeting by my silence and sincere hope that said yutes continue on their charted course. needless to say, i am more careful about my choice of park benches these days.

They were talking about someone else, correct? If his sister was the one holding your ####### then yes you should have reached for your gun.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Downtown Elizabeth was down at the nasty end of the scale for me, though I think that whole general area (and the surrounding towns) have the same issues with gang crime. The residential parts a half mile past the high street are pretty nasty - lots of boarded up homes and people out on their stoops.

Irvington too - drove through there a couple of times and had a not so nice experience with a potential landlord there (this is when we were apartment hunting and didn't really know the area).

The hoods I'm talking about are similar to Elizabeth, but much better than Irvton.

[nowhereman 1]

The guy was certainly threatened, but the real issue is whether or not deadly force was necessary. Judging by the story it seems like deadly force was excessive, but at the same time the sentence seems excessive as well. If I were on the jury I would have convicted the guy of a lesser charge vs. what I believe was a murder charge (maybe something like negligent homicide would be more appropriate).