Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 3 votes

DHS Supplier Provides Shooting Targets of


  • Please log in to reply
217 replies to this topic

#76    pallidin

pallidin

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,790 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:06 PM

Huh. I looked at the website, as well as the graphic targets.

I have no knowledge one way or another, but I think that if a civilian points a gun at a LEO, anywhere in the world, the reasonable expectation is that the civilian intends(or could accidentally) to pull the trigger.
Thus, general policy is for the LEO to shoot first if possible when a gun is pointed at him/her. I'm fairly certain that there has not been even a single court case, anywhere, where an LEO shooting a civilian pointing a gun at the LEO has ever been deemed "unjustifiable" Could be wrong.

Futher presumption is that those "civilian scenario targets" are by no means the primary shooting practice targets; rather, likely a secondary, temporary course of training.

So, my opinion is that anyone who thinks these special targets are the primary/only training targets are, uh, paranoid.


#77    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,838 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:07 PM

View PostOverSword, on 20 February 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

DHS was formed why?..........To fight terrorists.  So explain again why these scenarios need to be practiced by DHS?

Perhaps they've noticed a number of people within the US crying out that its time to overthrow the government...

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#78    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:08 PM

http://www.infowars....can-gun-owners/

Lets review these "paper" targets and then please step off your pedestal.


#79    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,838 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:10 PM

View PostOverSword, on 20 February 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

Misleading a little?  He wasn't exactly a school shooter the gun went off in his back pack.  Your anequdotes are lame.

What are you talking about? Did you read the page?
"The incident began when 6-year-old Dedrick Owens found a Davis Industries P-32 .32-caliber handgun in his uncle's home,[2][3] and brought the firearm, along with a knife, to Buell Elementary School. Further in the day, during a change of classes, Owens fatally shot 6-year-old Kayla Rolland in the presence of a teacher and 22 students while they were moving up a floor on the stairs, saying to her: "I don't like you", before pulling the trigger."

View PostAsteroidX, on 20 February 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

http://www.infowars....can-gun-owners/

Lets review these "paper" targets and then please step off your pedestal.

I already reviewed the pictures, thankyouverymuch.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#80    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:11 PM

Quote

I already reviewed the pictures, thankyouverymuch.

If you did then why are you calling them paper targets.


#81    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:12 PM

View PostStellar, on 20 February 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

Perhaps they've noticed a number of people within the US crying out that its time to overthrow the government...

So they are self fulfilling the prophecy?

If there was a pregnant woman on a killing spree, i don't think anyone would have to have desensitizing training in order to pull the trigger to stop her.


#82    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,579 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:12 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 20 February 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

http://www.infowars....can-gun-owners/

These targets were requested by DHS. These people are evil to the core. Guess its getting easier to figure out what the 2 billion bullets they bought over the last year are really for. Judging from the Iraq war, that is enough ammo to engage an enemy for over 25 years.

Infowars....how did I know that even before I opened the thread.

From the link:

"The company’s website offers a line of “No More Hesitation” targets ”designed to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training.” The targets are, “meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time.”

Seems perfectly legitimate to me.  Some may be in shock by this, but guess what, you're just as dead if a gang banger shot you or a pregnant woman shot you.

"You can't have freedom of religion without having freedom from the religious beliefs of other people."

#83    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:14 PM

Quote

subjects that are not the norm during training.” The targets are, “meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time.”

Is that more or less sublte then Hitlers Third Reich. Im not up on the proganda of that regime. Jew much anyone ?


#84    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,838 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:20 PM

View PostUncle Sam, on 20 February 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

What is your deal man? What if it was you that is staring down the sight of barrel in your face by DHS? Second Amendment gives us the right to rebel against a tyrant government or oppressive government, those who do so to free our nation again will be considered terrorists by the government. Common sense dictates that they are training to face this type of scenario, because majority of the rebellion would in fact would contain every race and creed of Americans there is. Don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from. You got to understand, this is a dual use and immoral decision by the government to depict the very people they are sworn to protect as threats or enemies of the very establishment.

No, its not.

Lets take your scenario, but say that 2% of the populationd decided "hey, we're going to start shooting people up" while the rest of the population wanted nothing of it. Is it wrong for the government officials to defend themselves?

My deal is that the people in charge of training have a responsibility to train their subordinates to survive any encounter that threatens their lives--- a responsibility I fully understand and share because I have the same responsibility. You don't "prepare" for such a situation by not training for it, and training for it doesnt mean that you want it to happen or that you'll force it to happen.

My other "deal" is that people are flipping out at everything right now. Its like the crazytrain left the station and almost everyone got on. This is not an indication that the US is preparing to disarm people, or go in and search peoples houses without their rights. This isnt an indication that the DHS is doing anything wrong because you have no idea what *scenarios* the DHS is training people to do.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#85    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:23 PM

Yeah the source of this story gives it a strong smell. Infowars policy seems to be to make people terrified of any kind of government authority and convince people that any second now the government is going slaughter them. Hardly a good source for these types of stories.


Anyway assuming the story is true there's a number of reasonable explaination for getting these targets such as training for when they are confronted by a pregnant woman trying to kill them or perhaps being used as civilian targets were hitting them means a fail. Or maybe they were just cheap and they went that route. This seems to be more of a stupid move that will result in a PR nightmare than any kind of evil planning. So perhaps we can calm down a bit and wait for additional information from sources that aren't massively bias on these topics before freaking out.

Edited by Corp, 20 February 2013 - 09:24 PM.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#86    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,838 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:25 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 20 February 2013 - 09:11 PM, said:

If you did then why are you calling them paper targets.

Because they're made of paper?

Quote


If there was a pregnant woman on a killing spree, i don't think anyone would have to have desensitizing training in order to pull the trigger to stop her.

And you would be wrong. Read the books "On Killing" and "On Combat". They describe it very well. Even in war time, prior to the appearance of human shaped targets, soldiers had a hard time pulling the trigger. This problem was largely solved by having soldiers train on human shaped targets rather than bullseye targets.

So, even in wartime when there was another human-being out there shooting you --- As would be expected by any soldier --- hesitation prevented some of them from pulling the trigger.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#87    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:29 PM

Quote

Because they're made of paper?

3D printer paper ? cause Im confused ?


#88    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:32 PM

Quote

No, its not.

Lets take your scenario, but say that 2% of the populationd decided "hey, we're going to start shooting people up" while the rest of the population wanted nothing of it. Is it wrong for the government officials to defend themselves?

My deal is that the people in charge of training have a responsibility to train their subordinates to survive any encounter that threatens their lives--- a responsibility I fully understand and share because I have the same responsibility. You don't "prepare" for such a situation by not training for it, and training for it doesnt mean that you want it to happen or that you'll force it to happen.

My other "deal" is that people are flipping out at everything right now. Its like the crazytrain left the station and almost everyone got on. This is not an indication that the US is preparing to disarm people, or go in and search peoples houses without their rights. This isnt an indication that the DHS is doing anything wrong because you have no idea what *scenarios* the DHS is training people to do.

Based on this analoigy we should be out training right now as citizens. But we arent. Its called the moral high ground. We intend to keep it.


#89    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:32 PM

View PostStellar, on 20 February 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

Because they're made of paper?



And you would be wrong. Read the books "On Killing" and "On Combat". They describe it very well. Even in war time, prior to the appearance of human shaped targets, soldiers had a hard time pulling the trigger. This problem was largely solved by having soldiers train on human shaped targets rather than bullseye targets.

So, even in wartime when there was another human-being out there shooting you --- As would be expected by any soldier --- hesitation prevented some of them from pulling the trigger.

Thats true, in soldiers first combat situations many deliberately aim high. After a few of their mates have been hit, it does not take long for them to start aiming true.

What that has to do with a pregnant woman on a killing spree, i don't know. Maybe LEO's have started using soldiers?

Now as for the actual targets we are discussing, its kinda hard to go on a killing spree in your own home. Especially with all those hormones running around and a craving for chocolate covered watermelon.


#90    Simbi Laveau

Simbi Laveau

    Overlord A. Snuffleupagus

  • Member
  • 8,266 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2012
  • Location:Rim of hell

  • ~So what's all this then ?!

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:34 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 20 February 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

http://www.infowars....can-gun-owners/

These targets were requested by DHS. These people are evil to the core. Guess its getting easier to figure out what the 2 billion bullets they bought over the last year are really for. Judging from the Iraq war, that is enough ammo to engage an enemy for over 25 years.

Shhh,we are all imagining it . Social security and the oceanographic society also always buy bullets too . Means nothing .Hand in all your own guns now ,and be content to know your government has all your best interests at heart .

Miss me?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users