TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Excaliber wrote:I guess I'll just have to get used to clumsy language on this point unless someone can suggest a slicker way of talking about regular folks who aren't cops.

On Adam-12 they called them citizens.

That would solve the problem if it weren't for the fact that LEO's are citizens too.

I suppose we could start a whole new set of terminology for those with Level 1 arrest powers (citizens with the power to make a citizen's arrest) and Level 2 arrest powers (local LEO authority), and go up through levels 3 and 4 for state and federal jurisdiction.

(Sigh) It was so much easier when I could just call regular folks "civilians".

It was pointed out in another thread recently that the word civilian can be used to refer to non-leo's according to the dictionary definition. From the Webster's dictionary:

Main Entry: ci·vil·ian
Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2 a : one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force

BrianSW99 wrote:

Excaliber wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Excaliber wrote:I guess I'll just have to get used to clumsy language on this point unless someone can suggest a slicker way of talking about regular folks who aren't cops.

On Adam-12 they called them citizens.

That would solve the problem if it weren't for the fact that LEO's are citizens too.

I suppose we could start a whole new set of terminology for those with Level 1 arrest powers (citizens with the power to make a citizen's arrest) and Level 2 arrest powers (local LEO authority), and go up through levels 3 and 4 for state and federal jurisdiction.

(Sigh) It was so much easier when I could just call regular folks "civilians".

It was pointed out in another thread recently that the word civilian can be used to refer to non-leo's according to the dictionary definition. From the Webster's dictionary:

Main Entry: ci·vil·ian
Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2 a : one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force

Thanks, Brian.

I'll resume my use of "civilian" with the understanding on this forum that all such references are to be read under Webster's Dictionary definition 2 above.

Excaliber wrote:I'll resume my use of "civilian" with the understanding on this forum that all such references are to be read under Webster's Dictionary definition 2 above.

Does that mean civilians should start using definition 6 on this forum?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pig" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

roberts wrote:

Excaliber wrote:I'll resume my use of "civilian" with the understanding on this forum that all such references are to be read under Webster's Dictionary definition 2 above.

Does that mean civilians should start using definition 6 on this forum?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pig" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's not going to fly too far...

Getting back to the original post...I read this a few days ago and had to think on it awhile. As it turns out, your friend did exactly the right thing. Nobody died...perps got caught. I don't believe anyone can say, in this case anyway, that it would have been better to shoot. How would that have made the outcome of this case any better??? It could not have come out any better.

To throw in what I would have done...not that this would have been the right thing to do... I am pretty darned sure I would have drove off as quick as I could. That is IF I could have found an escape route. I might have even considered swerving my truck over to hit the perps car so I could disrupt their aim. I have a 7500 pound F250 so it can over power most vehicles on the road. I feel pretty darned sure I would not have just set still and pulled my weapon...unless I was trapped and could not start moving. I feel movement is real important in a gun fight. A sitting target is easier to hit.

The reality is that these situations can never be second guessed because there is always some little detail that changes everything. I am real glad your friend was not injured and he get's two thumbs up for helping to rid us of a couple scum bags...at least until some libtard judge turns them loose again.

I don't believe anyone can say, in this case anyway, that it would have been better to shoot. How would that have made the outcome of this case any better??? It could not have come out any better.

Because the outcome was undeterminable at the outset, the only sure way out was to shoot the carjacker. That course of action certainly cannot be considered better than the final outcome. But the latter did expose the victim to unnecessary risk, which could well have proved fatal. In which case, the shooting option would have been better. Now, ya'll excuse me, my Ninja has gotten loose from his cage and I gotta go find him before somebody in the hood calls the cops.

casingpoint wrote:

I don't believe anyone can say, in this case anyway, that it would have been better to shoot. How would that have made the outcome of this case any better??? It could not have come out any better.

Because the outcome was undeterminable at the outset, the only sure way out was to shoot the carjacker. That course of action certainly cannot be considered better than the final outcome. But the latter did expose the victim to unnecessary risk, which could well have proved fatal. In which case, the shooting option would have been better. Now, ya'll excuse me, my Ninja has gotten loose from his cage and I gotta go find him before somebody in the hood calls the cops.

While I agree that using deadly force would have been a reasonable response, doing so would not have delivered a sure outcome of any kind. Most pistol wounds are not immediate fight stoppers unless there's either extraordinary skill or luck involved. An arms length gunfight between two opponents with drawn handguns, like a knife fight, often ends with no winners - just degrees of losers.

The individual in the situation made a judgment call based on his "feeling" of what was right - and everyone came out alive. The good guy went home to his family with no medical or legal issues pending, and the bad guys went to jail. It's really hard to argue that a tactic that delivered the best possible outcome wasn't a good choice, but it's also good to keep in mind that the solution chosen here was situation specific and not a new standard that would deliver equally favorable results if applied in all carjackings.

Most pistol wounds are not immediate fight stoppers unless there's either extraordinary skill or luck involved.

My bad. I'm informing the Ninja to chill out.

Excaliber wrote:(Sigh) It was so much easier when I could just call regular folks "civilians".

The problem arises from the us-vs-them mindset that causes many cops to group everyone as cops or criminals. "Civilian" just became a politically correct way of saying "criminal we haven't got any good evidence on yet."

*sigh* Methinks it's time to lock this thread and move on to better things.

Before it gets locked, chalk one up for the Ninja that lurks in all of us.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 96375.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

casingpoint wrote:Before it gets locked, chalk one up for the Ninja that lurks in all of us.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 96375.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not sure this is a case of the homeowner using his own gun, but overpowering being able to overpower the guy or the gun going off during the fight and hitting the perp.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I would have lobbed some flash-bangs and some tear gas into the other truck to soften them up, before deploying my door ram and crushing open the door of their vehicle, preparatory to a full on ninja assault in which I dress in black, and rappel down from the roof of their cab and through the shattered window into the interior where I would administer a severe beating with one hand tied behind my back, followed by a stern lecture along the line of Robert Duvall's speech to wayward young men from Second Hand Lions... ...and then I would offer them each a fresh steak to hold over their black eyes...

...all to the tune of Bob Marley's "Bad Boys," of course.

Alternatively, I could have just hit the gas and run like heck. Being left handed which makes accessing my pistol in a hurry problematic; and being old, fat, and crippled, the alternative works better for me. I don't look that good in all black anyway.

Sorta like this?
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=XX8Y5-BZLaM[/youtube]

"Bad Boys" sung by Bob Marley?

I don't think Marley was still able to fog a mirror when the
"Cops" show debuted.

"Bad Boys" is by the band Inner Circle as the original artists, IIRC.

SIA

Have to throw my 2 cents worth about symantics .
I long ago gave up trying to please everyone about the specific usage of words. When words are clearly understood in a particular usage and context, and when the words are clearly not inted to offend intended, we as readers should undertand the usage of such words in the spirit in which they were intended. The language police who insist on the usage of words to be of their political correctness, are the folks who are being offencive, not the people who use words like civilian to mean some at a scene who is not a police officer. or clip to describe a ammunition magazine, gun to reference a military style rifle, or even as* to describe buttocks or donkey.

Its all in the context, and as ex army I for one take no offense at a police officer refering to me as a civilian. As an ex volunteer firefighter, I would have referred to a military person as a civilian while at a scene.