Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
preacherman76

DHS Supplier Provides Shooting Targets of

227 posts in this topic

Because the scenario could happen. Call comes in, LEO comes onto the scene, homeowner has a firearm and automatically trains it on whoever walks through the door. I know that if I were using a firearm in a home defense senario, the first LEO to open the door might be looking down the barrel at a hostile person. Or report comes in about a kid in the yard with a gun and the cops come on the scene weapons drawn because they don't know what to expect. Mom on the playground decides the courts are not going to take away her kids and uses a gun to try to keep them. Cops go onto the property of a cranky old man, and the old man tells them to get the eff off, waving a shotgun at them. Or a whole bunch of other plausible Non-traditional hostile scenarios.

There are other parts of this agency that are equiped to deal with these scenarios in anon violent way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the scenario could happen. Call comes in, LEO comes onto the scene, homeowner has a firearm and automatically trains it on whoever walks through the door. I know that if I were using a firearm in a home defense senario, the first LEO to open the door might be looking down the barrel at a hostile person. Or report comes in about a kid in the yard with a gun and the cops come on the scene weapons drawn because they don't know what to expect. Mom on the playground decides the courts are not going to take away her kids and uses a gun to try to keep them. Cops go onto the property of a cranky old man, and the old man tells them to get the eff off, waving a shotgun at them. Or a whole bunch of other plausible Non-traditional hostile scenarios.

Really, we read in the news about situations like these.

Again without more information, I'm not trying to make any comment about the whole thing. I was just suggesting some scenarios that would be plausible. And really the thread is moving too fast for me to keep up with, heh.

This is quite true. However, i would bet that all of the situations you mention combined only account for less than 1% off all police shootings. Why practise for this 1% over and above the 99% of situations (i.e hostage situation, car jacking/pursuit, armed robbery etc). Are these types of events predicted to increase for some reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My post was sarcastic.

Any one with a clear mind would see that an old man in his home with a shotgun is not a threat - a police officer in his home, trying to take his guns away - that's the real threat. The only reason an old man would grab a shotgun in his home to defend himself would be just that - to defend himself. They're taking it to the next level - which is practicing taking out people in their own homes to warm up against people with guns who resist unconstitutional gun laws or executive orders.

And if such a thing happens then the LEO's who come to the door are agents of an illegal government at that point. The old man, pregnant woman OR school child has just become the "minuteman" of our modern age. Just remember G Gordon Liddy's advice after WACO:LIDDY: Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests.
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if such a thing happens then the LEO's who come to the door are agents of an illegal government at that point. The old man, pregnant woman OR school child has just become the "minuteman" of our modern age. Just remember G Gordon Liddy's advice after WACO:LIDDY: Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests.

Amen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ruby Ridge, Waco....That college back in the 60's ...

@Silver Thong..those people were fighting for rights as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a ******* target for christs sake. Where are you getting this whole "entering her house without her consent" bull****? It's a piece of paper designed to train people to not hesitate shooting someone posing a threat. The goal of training is to prepare them for anything.

And how often will US soldiers be faced with pregnant US Citizens? The military deals with pregnant women carrying guns in Afghanistan and Iraq all the time. They aren't going to be surprised. These targets are nothing more than to desensitize the soldier from going against Americans. I really don't think it is going to work. After the first incident of a pregnant woman or child getting shot, there will be open rebellion and the majority of the military will join the people.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other parts of this agency that are equiped to deal with these scenarios in anon violent way.

The DHS or LEO? I wasn't speaking of the DHS, just the LEO. Like local cops. That's why I only used the terms LEO and cops.

And Buzzkill... Why only this 1%? Perhaps because it's just a tiny part of their entire target and scenario catalog and we don't know about it because their website is down? I was only trying to state some plausible reasons for these particular targets in correlation to LEO, nothing else.

Crud, and now a few more posts have blown by... pttht...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if such a thing happens then the LEO's who come to the door are agents of an illegal government at that point. The old man, pregnant woman OR school child has just become the "minuteman" of our modern age. Just remember G Gordon Liddy's advice after WACO:LIDDY: Well, if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests.

I never missed a head shot. I mastered the double tap, one in the chest and one in the head. Pistol and Rifles. Never would I want to take another person's life, but if it boils down to my freedoms or being enslaved, I choose my freedoms above a tyrant government that threatens to take away my rights. You would see me in the forefront of the battlefield. I wouldn't pride myself in it, but I will do what needs to be done to keep my children future and other's future free of tyrant governments. Unlike other civilians out there, I had the benefit to being trained by multiple ex-servicemen in multiple types of scenarios.

Edited by Uncle Sam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the number of open carry states in America and the right to bear arms and defend your home and property being legal. This would be a stupid thing to train for and can only be viewed as an agitative act by DHS towards us the citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The DHS or LEO

Both Swat and DHS have hostage negotiation teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the number of open carry states in America and the right to bear arms and defend your home and property being legal. This would be a stupid thing to train for and can only be viewed as an agitative act by DHS towards us the citizens.

Exactly. They would have a bad day if encountered me in a rebellion if they push to far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have very little Federal intervention in Oregon besides there court system. We are also an open carry state and have a threshold law that if someone enters your home you can shoot to kill. So if the DHS/LEO enter without a warrant you are free to kill them as well and will likely not be imprisoned for it. If you let them in your screwing yourself. And will have to submit to whatever they do behind closed doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Like in many Dystopian novels the current regime views political opponents as dreadful enemies.

Liberty lovers (you know, the word written on our currency), believers in the Second Amendment, returning Veterans, Libertarians - we're all domestic terrorists.

And just like in many Dystopian novels the word "terrorist" will be thrown around liberally to describe anyone who is an opponent to the establishment.

The NDAA specified the United States as the battleground - the inhabitants who aren't Progressives are the terrorists.

Edited by Eonwe
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These targets are for desensitizing shooters to people that any civilized person would hesitate to shoot. The thing is, how many times in the last decade has a pregnant white woman attacked a LEO or a little white kid pulled a pistol on a LEO? I'd bet in the last decade it has happened once or twice so just WITF is the point of practicing against such a threat? This should be front page news but then again, the liberals have no qualms because it is their guy in the White House.

Whats the point? Because it accomplishes 2 different things for the price of 1. It accomplishes just normal shooting practice (as would a picture of any bad guy), and it helps desensitize them to shooting a non-traditional hostile target if they ever do encounter one.

Youngest school shooter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Kayla_Rolland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point isn't guns. It's that it's your average law abiding citizen fed up with tyranny and the need to desensitize the troops that would normally side with the people. I'm surprise that they don't have a target like this:

http://i.istockimg.c...nting-a-gun.jpg

Or even this one:

http://files.schumin...fawkes-mask.jpg

The point is to desensitize the people their training so that they dont loose their life due to hesitation. THAT is the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Youngest school shooter:

http://en.wikipedia....f_Kayla_Rolland

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

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats the point? Because it accomplishes 2 different things for the price of 1. It accomplishes just normal shooting practice (as would a picture of any bad guy), and it helps desensitize them to shooting a non-traditional hostile target if they ever do encounter one.

Youngest school shooter:

http://en.wikipedia....f_Kayla_Rolland

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.

Edited by Uncle Sam
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a likely scenario Stellar. Recent history has an old man holed up in a bunker with a young boy and they were able to extract him using tactical training techniques.

So the fact the old man has a gun and is willing to defend his home is not an obscure idea in America.

My god AsteroidX---thank you. Finally someone rational in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those arent paper targets btw. There scenario targets.

... made out of paper...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But let's say a cop has orders to confiscate your weapons and forcefully enters your property - what would you do? Do you believe a man has no right to defend himself on his own land just because the person going after him, albeit crooked, is still a "cop"?

You clearly miss the intent of the target. This isnt a discussion about the "right" of the "person in the picture" because the right of the person in the picture depends on the circumstances --- something that a "paper target" doesnt have.

The cop, whenever he enters a house with his weapon drawn, needs to be able to protect himself and his own life, and that is the point of these types of non-traditional targets.

We can use an Afghanistan scenario: Does an Afghan not have the right to defend himself on his own land just because the people on his land are soldiers? Well, I can tell you this: It doesnt matter what the "rights" are of the Afghan man because if he's holding a weapon up ready to shoot at a soldier, the soldier is supposed to be trained to shoot and kill him before the man shoots them.

They are afraid of those that believe in the Constitution and are willing to stand up to tyranny.

Yeah... and you got all that from a paper target?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the two update articles infowars had attached to the OP article... They do not know if DHS has purchased any of these particular targets or not. They seem to have had a confirmation of LEO purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is to desensitize the people their training so that they dont loose their life due to hesitation. THAT is the point.

Don't you think that its unwise to desensitize the police or DHS or any other entity that has firearms and might be put into situations where they have to make quick decisions about our lifes or deaths? Perhaps there is a good reason to hesitate when pointing a weapon at a pregnant lady? Namely, a "What the **** am I doing" reason.

Imagine if citizens were desensitizing themselves with inappropriate targets, would you have a problem with that? There is a reason we are sensitive around women/children/elderly. Mostly because they are the most vunerable people in our society and need protection, not a desensitized police state.

As for the "its only paper" arguement; its not about the material, its about the intent. The intent of the target is to represent a pregnant woman or child.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is to desensitize the people their training so that they dont loose their life due to hesitation. THAT is the point.

If they are shooting at pregnant women children and old men and can tell you who Im going to route for. Minus the pschotic crazed shooter scenarios theres others ways of dealing with these scenarios.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The military deals with pregnant women carrying guns in Afghanistan and Iraq all the time. They aren't going to be surprised.

Its not about "surprise" its about hesitation and desensitization. Thats why targets arent bullseye targets anymore.

Coming from a soldiers perspective (and someone who's trained new recruits) I understand the importance of desensitzing them so that it doesnt matter *what* the target looks like, they pull the trigger when they're in their rights to do so.

The paper targets arent going to "brainwash" people into thinking that every pregnant white woman is a badguy. The paper targets are going to reduce the chances that the LEO (or whatever the DHS officers call themselves) hesitates if they ever encounter one.

The target itself is made of paper. It has no "story". It can be placed into any context, any scenario ranging from "Go in and kill everything for no reason" to "that pregnant woman lost her daughter and went nuts, deciding no one else's children should live".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.