In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article om,
says...

On 9/29/2012 12:29 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/29/2012 12:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 12:09:35 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


Stop playing Dick Tracy. You will be shown the truth by the expert
investigators..........................in due time.

But Scotty said, and I quote: "The cops said it was a weapon". So he
really should be able to show me, wouldn't you think?

A police statement released by Lieutenant J. Paul Vance, a spokesman
for the Connecticut State Police, explains what happened next.
?Believing the suspect was armed with a weapon and about to attack
him, the (father) discharged his personal handgun at the suspect.? The
father then found the victim ?lying on the ground in the driveway with
obvious gunshot injuries, holding a weapon?.


"holding a weapon"


Now can we write the stupid **** off?

But...But Looky hasn't finished his cross examination.

None needed. I guess you and Scotty and Greg aren't bright enough to
understand the difference in what a reporter said and Scotty's assertion
that " COP" said he had a weapon.

You are too stupid and words cannot describe your ignorance.

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

On 9/30/2012 11:57 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

There is certainly a pile of circumstantial EVIDENCE here that will
undoubtedly be used to steer an investigation which could lead to a
charge of some sort and possibly a trial.
(See if Loogy can pick up on the subtle reference to a stupid remark he
made recently)

On 9/30/2012 1:56 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 12:19:08 -0400, Meyer wrote:

On 9/30/2012 11:57 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

There is certainly a pile of circumstantial EVIDENCE here that will
undoubtedly be used to steer an investigation which could lead to a
charge of some sort and possibly a trial.
(See if Loogy can pick up on the subtle reference to a stupid remark he
made recently)

A trial for what? Shooting someone who is coming at you with a knife?

Well maybe in Connecticut.

Yes maybe. Ct. is a Castle Doctrine state.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

The kid didn't have a bag of apples he was going to peal.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

The kid didn't have a bag of apples he was going to peal.

So in your mind he had a knife to use to commit a crime? Damn, that's a
stretch! No wonder you think that Zimmerman was accosted by a kid with a
bag of Skittles.

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:09:04 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

So in your mind he had a knife to use to commit a crime? Damn, that's a
stretch!

===

The analysis is really very simple:

- A masked intruder advances towards you with a knife in his hand.

- A knife is a deadly weapon.

- You have a split second to make a decision: Try to outrun them;
Defend yourself (which you are prepared to do); Take a chance on being
attacked with a deadly weapon.

Your choice.

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 11:57:46 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

Careful now, you are running backward so fast you might go back in
time.

First he didn't have a weapon, then it wasn't a knife, now you are
saying he didn't really mean to hurt anyone with the knife. Pretty
soon it will be "well he didn't stab anyone"

Look up Tueller drill. Pop did exactly what you would learn in a
handgun class. A person advancing with a knife is an imminent threat.
At 21 feet, you have about a second to a second and a half before you
are stabbed.

Try this. It's only a weapon if it's the users intent to use it as such.
What is so hard to understand about that?

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 11:57:46 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 08:41:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Well, then oh, so smart, show me where a COP said that the kid had a
weapon.

I gave you the quote from Vance, the investigating officer who said
the kid was laying dead with a knife in his hand when the cops
arrived.

I suppose dad might have planted the knife on him, is that your
assertion?

How do you know his intent was to use the knife as a weapon? As I stated
before, anything can be a weapon if there is INTENT to use it as a
weapon, even your head. Oh, and your assertion before that he probably
had a record, etc. was dead wrong.

Careful now, you are running backward so fast you might go back in
time.

First he didn't have a weapon, then it wasn't a knife, now you are
saying he didn't really mean to hurt anyone with the knife. Pretty
soon it will be "well he didn't stab anyone"

Look up Tueller drill. Pop did exactly what you would learn in a
handgun class. A person advancing with a knife is an imminent threat.
At 21 feet, you have about a second to a second and a half before you
are stabbed.

Try this. It's only a weapon if it's the users intent to use it as such.
What is so hard to understand about that?


-------------------------------
Carry a conceal gun without a permit and convince the judge it is not a
weapon. Tell him you only carried for self defense. See what progresses.