Monday, August 29, 2011

Blocking firearms

Some self-defence systems teach how to disarm people with firearms, in particular krav maga. Krav maga is the IDF method of self-defence.




How To Disarm A Gun? -

The fact that someone who is facing the possiblity of being shot might resist is something you seem to neglect in your worship of the firearm.

33 comments:

  1. Yes, indeed. The average gun guy we talk to on the blogs, I'd bet, is not very versed in these methods. Why, because they have no need since they've got that magical, mystical "tool."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shall not be infringedAugust 29, 2011 at 6:23 PM

    The fact that someone who is facing the possibility of being loaded into boxcars, might resist is something you readily dismiss in your fear/loathing of firearms.

    And why should you be allowed to CC firearms, as a lawyer, you are closer to law enforcement and their protection, than the average citizen and are in much less need of the individual right to keep and bear arms?

    What makes you special?

    Other than your hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I suspect Mikeb that they put far too much reliance on their 'tools', LOL - all varieties of 'tools'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shall not be infringedAugust 29, 2011 at 6:27 PM

    Is this the method that you recommend to your elderly clients when they come to you with their concerns of gun violence?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Shall not be infringedAugust 29, 2011 at 6:28 PM

    And this is why you shoot someone that is inside of 21' and you shoot them till they stop moving.

    So they can't take your gun.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shall not be infringedAugust 29, 2011 at 6:36 PM

    Wow krav maga sure did not help the brain trust in this case, he could not even take the gun away from a 72 year old invalid after 8 hours.

    http://www.rgj.com/article/20110822/NEWS01/110822038/Homeowner-held-burglary-suspect-gunpoint-8-hours

    But don't let that ruin you reliance narrative you fricking whore.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There was another video that I am not going to post for them, but let's say that if you are going to only going to rely on a firearm, you could be more of a danger to yourself than an assailant.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is so hard to reason with the closed minded / simple minded / foul mouthed gun-nutz Laci.

    They will grab onto any story which they believe supports their position (whether it does or not), while ignoring everything that contradicts their position.

    There are more instances of gun violence which results in victims being hurt or killed.

    Including the elderly, like this one.

    Cherry picking like that is intellectually dishonest.

    ReplyDelete
  9. unhinged, can you prove that anyone knew krav maga or other self-defence techniques in the story you mention?

    Otherwise, it's another of your idiotic analogies.

    Additionally, you like to use emotion rather than reason. Emotional arguments don’t depend on a rational theory that can be disproved: they appeals to things no one can object.

    ReplyDelete
  10. fringie, I do not believe that Laci is in the habit of carrying a firearm.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dog gone is correct, I do not use a firearm for self-defense and it is not my first choice.

    If your homeowner is not well enough to use self-defense, he is probably not strong enough to carry a gun for that purpose.

    One of my reasons for posting these videos is to show that a gun can be taken from you.

    If you are seriously suggesting that this homeowner could get the drop on the home invader who is pointing a gun at him, then you are far dumber than I give you credit for being, Unhinged.

    Your assertion is far more laughable than mine as these videos demonstrate.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Shall not be infringedAugust 29, 2011 at 11:56 PM

    You are one seriously obtuse sack of lawyer....

    One of my reasons for posting these videos is to show that a gun can be taken from you.

    Why couldn't three healthy men take a gun from one 72yo man who in your words, is not well enough to use self-defense, he is probably not strong enough to carry a gun for that purpose.

    But he was since he shot two scumbags and lived thru the encounter....

    Kinda ruins your quaint little narrative.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 12:02 AM

    They will grab onto any story which they believe supports their position (whether it does or not), while ignoring everything that contradicts their position.

    Three grown men could not take a gun from a infirm 72 year old.... and you morons see it as the 72 year old needs to be disarmed.....

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think mikeyw's sockpuppet is gettin' a little bit antsy.

    "The fact that someone who is facing the possibility of being loaded into boxcars, might resist is something you readily dismiss in your fear/loathing of firearms."

    Well, in the first instance, your little tantrum has nothing to do with the subject of the post. Secondly,it's got nothing to do with MY fear/loathing of firearms. It's got everything to do with my distrust of and disdain for shitheadz like "Shall be unhinged".

    ReplyDelete
  15. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 4:07 AM

    Laci The Dog said...

    You take stupid pills,unhinged?


    Three adult males enter the home of a septuagenarian, with nothing but larceny in their hearts, unjustly the old man shoots one of them, is so infirm that for four hours he cannot force the one who for unknown reasons does not flee at the sight of a gun out of his abode.

    This poor brave redistributionist after these four hours then attacks the homeowner with the homeowners own cane and gets himself shot in the hand for the effort, and still takes the HO 4 additional hours to make the mildly wounded individual leave his home.


    I'm stupid, yet you as a lawyer cannot present a simple defense, for this member of mensa....

    Please, please, please, use small words, because I am so stupid, convince me that the third man should go free and the old man should be disarmed and go to prison for exercising his second amendment rights.

    Use your twisted/perverted 2nd amendment logic, and explain how the old man is in the wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 4:19 AM

    dumb-ole-commie said...

    Well, in the first instance, your little tantrum has nothing to do with the subject of the post. Secondly,it's got nothing to do with MY fear/loathing of firearms. It's got everything to do with my distrust of and disdain for shitheadz like "Shall be unhinged".


    Well grandpa, I realize that the new fangled inter-tubes thing in the media center at the ole Marxist home might be on the fritz but, but if you had a little reading comprehension of your own you might see that I was responding to Laci the pooch's tag at the end of his little guns are useless because of a training video.

    So then the question to you is do you own guns, or are they too scary?

    Laci seems to think that your infirmities should prevent you from possessing a firearm,..... I think that he might be right.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yep, he takes stupid pills.

    And ones that make him see things.

    Fringy, even the Supreme Court says people like you shouldn't have guns:

    nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, Heller at 54-5

    ReplyDelete
  18. democommie thinks the Shall not be infringed guy is Mike W. I don't know, but I'd bet we know him by another name.

    demo, have you compared IP addresses or something, or are you going by the level of intellectual prowess displayed in these frequent comments?

    You see, the frequency reminds me of Weer'd or Bob S., but I'm not sure.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 5:23 PM

    Laci The Dog said...

    Yep, he takes stupid pills.


    Yet your brilliant legal mind can't present a simple defense for an accused thief that could not manage to escape from a frail 72 yo old man w/ a gun, who in your eye should never have been allowed to have the gun in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Unhinged, come back when your doctor has prescribed anti-psychotic drugs for you.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Unhinged fringie, Laci hasn't been hired to defend anyone. Of did you wish to pop for the $500 an hour services he bills on behalf of the bad guys?

    Laci has never argued that someone should not have a firearm under legal provisions. He, and others here, have argued that reling on firearms to the extent that you do for self defense is frequently counterproductive, and even deadly.

    None of us here have a problem with secure storage of firearms, or with enjoyment of shooting sports. What we object to is the number of guns which are illegally possessed, illegally used, and which result in us having such a damnably high rate of gun violence in contrast to those countries which are more restrictive.

    You are a one trick pony, unhinged fringe. You believe that all guns must be good, more guns must be better, regardless of any other pertinent or useful details. You simply ignore or deny whatever doesn't fit your point of view. That is intellectually dishonest, it demonstrates a detachment and disconnect from reality.

    Clearly, the world wide statistics demonstrate that fewer guns, not more guns, result in less gun violence, be it homicide, injury, suicide, all categories.

    The solution to our problems are not more guns or more violence.

    You have yet to present a cogent or persuasive argument that refutes that. And you won't because you can't; you don't HAVE such a reasoned argument, you don't have a factual position.

    What your position boils down to is simply a screeching "but I want guns!".

    Grow up, and damn it, learn to think, become fact-based and connected to reality.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 7:17 PM

    Laci has never argued that someone should not have a firearm under legal provisions. He, and others here, have argued that reling on firearms to the extent that you do for self defense is frequently counterproductive, and even deadly.

    Laci the dog certainly seems to be arguing the case that the elderly or infirm should not have firearms....

    Laci The Dog said...

    If your homeowner is not well enough to use self-defense, he is probably not strong enough to carry a gun for that purpose.


    Laci the Eugenist who would have thunk it?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 7:22 PM

    You are a one trick pony, unhinged fringe. You believe that all guns must be good, more guns must be better, regardless of any other pertinent or useful details.

    Unlike you I do not attribute morality to inanimate objects.....

    ReplyDelete
  24. Shall not be infringedAugust 30, 2011 at 7:26 PM

    dog gone said...

    Unhinged fringie, Laci hasn't been hired to defend anyone. Of did you wish to pop for the $500 an hour services he bills on behalf of the bad guys?


    As far as I can tell he was never been hired to argue his collective rights nonsense about the second amendment at the SCotUS either, yet he spouts here all day.....

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fringie, Laci writes here for his own purposes, on his own time. You were bewailing his lack of writing about what you wanted; he is not obliged to do that.

    As to when or how many firearms Laci may choose to own - or not - at any given time, that is his business. He is not obligated to keep me updated on those details.

    And as to impressing me, Laci impressed me ages ago, with is brainpower, not his firepower. It is rare I have the pleasure of meeting another polyhistor of his caliber (pun intended).

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wellfringedbrokenhinged:

    This:


    "The fact that someone who is facing the possibility of being loaded into boxcars, might resist is something you readily dismiss in your fear/loathing of firearms."

    has absolutely nothing to do with the video Laci posted.

    Show me the boxcar, by all means.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Shall not be infringedAugust 31, 2011 at 6:18 PM

    dog gone said...

    As to when or how many firearms Laci may choose to own - or not - at any given time, that is his business. He is not obligated to keep me updated on those details.


    So Laci added you to his fuckwit list, after you outed him, as a closeted gun owner.

    Oh the shame and humiliation he must have felt.

    Don't you feel a little dirty for doing him like that

    I'll ask you the same thing that I asked Laci, four days ago when you posted this,

    And while I think there ARE people who do - I would include Laci in that group, because he works with sometimes dangerous criminals as a criminal defense attorney - I do not think most people need one. Even Laci rarely carries, rather like me, relying instead on his powers of observation, and his ability to handle the hazards he encounters.

    So was Laci the crusader against individual gun ownership trying to impress you that he was a gun carrying hypocrite or were you lying/trying to impress me with how you are so smart?

    Because it sure sound like you two sure like to impress each other....

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hey, unhinged, I was in the military.

    Does that make sense to your sick mind?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Unhinged, your attempts at insults wouild only work if you knew what you were talking about.

    But you don't.

    Instead, you show yourself up for ibeing a pathetitc little idiot.

    In fact, if we're getting into it, you pretty much don't know what you're talking about.

    I think you're just a sock puppet who is told what to write.

    Unfortunately, your script writer needs to go back to school.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hey, unhinged, would a gun have helped at Halabja?

    I remember the Iraquis were pretty well armed--even under Saddam.

    ReplyDelete