Resolution - Salt Lake CCW Shooting

[Rugerlvr]

"Yes, we're all well aware of that now. How about you let the DA, with all the facts in front of her decide whether or not to press charges, and then we'll have an opinion from someone who knows a hell of a lot more about the situation than you do."

Hey wait a minute camslam, isn't this a quote from me? Why you attributing it to FCFC?

 

[camslam]

Sorry Ruger. That particular post was tough to read, FCFC had put someone else's comments in a quote box, and then followed it up with your quote in italics. He didn't make any comments on that particular post, but appearances made it look so.

I will correct and edit. My bad.

 

[TCB in TN]

TCB, nice quote in the sigline! Milo Ivan Anderson is a gentleman and a scholar.

Milo is my hero, and I would love to have some of his more abominable creations myself.

But back to the thread, Over the years (especially during my youth) I had the misfortune to have been involved in a small physical confrontation with a guy who was supposed to be really tough, after wards I ended up with a big reputation. (A little scrawny guy with a big rep, and a big mouth can get a lot of unwanted attention.) After a short period of time I began to realize the difference between talkers and those who were serious. That knowledge didn't come quick or without some pain. While I am a big fan of training, I know from my own experience (and the words of others I know and trust) that training and real world seldom look the same. Training does help, but when it comes down to the real deal mostly you have to keep your head and trust your gut.

 

[anarchris]

I suspected from the begininning(SP SORRY)

That the bum had threatened to kill.

FcFc, what about punching homeless people, do you still advocate that?

 

[Dustinthewind]

FCFC, crow is best eaten while it is still warm.
A few of my thoughts on this justified shooting. First, Harrison was acting in his duty as a security guard, he has a vested interest in the actions of individuals at the restaurant, you or I would have the option of leaving, he does not.You asked what size were the individuals. In fisticuffs size is not as important as skill level, intent, and determination. Also it is not wise to get into fist fights while you are carrying a firearm. In a fistfight a firearm on your person becomes more of a liability than an asset, you must defend yourself and you must defend against your firearm being taken from you and used against you. As far as the decedent being unarmed, that is a moot point at spitting distances. There are people out there that are skilled enough with their hands to kill you in an instant whether you are armed or not, and the thing is, when you are in this situation, you do not know the skill level of your aggressor, and if you hesitate to act it might cost you your life.

 

[Correia]

Jkimball, that's a tough question, as every single situation is fluid and different.

Each time you've got to make a judgement call about the person you're dealing with. In some situations you've got the aggresive drunk who you can just be friendly and apologetic with. Other cases you've got somebody who's high on who knows what and the voices in their head tell them to swallow your soul. Him, you're gonna have to shoot.

As a rule of thumb, shooting is always what you want to use last. So if you can solve a problem by walking away, backing down, apologizing, whatever, you do it.

This is not an easy thing to explain on something like an online forum, but is better learned through training and practice. Cops spend a lot of time working on their "verbal judo".

That said, people who have no clue will often think that every situation can be solved peacefully. People like FCFC, or Barack Obama, for example. In reality, you de-escalate whenever possible, but when you're in fear for your life, you take immediate action, or you pay for your hesitation.

 

[camslam]

That said, people who have no clue will often think that every situation can be solved peacefully. People like FCFC, or Barack Obama, for example. In reality, you de-escalate whenever possible, but when you're in fear for your life, you take immediate action, or you pay for your hesitation.

Yep. And there are quite a few posts in Strategy and Tactics that echo that same attitude of either avoiding every bad situation or resolving it peacefully. If you can do that, by all means, but it doesn't always happen and you better be ready.

 

[FCFC]

First, Harrison was acting in his duty as a security guard, he has a vested interest in the actions of individuals at the restaurant, you or I would have the option of leaving, he does not.

Did Harrison work at the Mama's Plantation restaurant? I missed that. He was described only as an "off duty security guard"....

As far as the decedent being unarmed, that is a moot point at spitting distances.... There are people out there that are skilled enough with their hands to kill you in an instant whether you are armed or not, and the thing is, when you are in this situation, you do not know the skill level of your aggressor, and if you hesitate to act it might cost you your life.

Why did Harrison let Mays get to 2-3 feet then?

 

[FCFC]

FCFC...Right Again....Part 1

I would be curious to know what our good friend FCFC has to say. Especially with the interest and positions he took on the original story.

With the amount of energy FCFC placed posting in the original thread on this story and then opening up his own thread, I think many of us would be interested in his take.

...but for as big a deal as was made by him on this event, man up and face the music.

You can read more of his opinion on this if interested.

Like I said, man up and face the music, you were wrong, admit it.

Well, camslam, I think you have a good point: that the positions I took on the original story in the two prior threads are worth looking at in view of the announcement by SLC DA that no charges would be filed against I'm not sure you're gonna like what my prior positions actually were, though. They were pretty much right on the mark.



First, the two prior THR threads on the Harrison/Mays shooting (HMS) are at:

Lethal shooting in Salt Lake City, UT; CCW holder was the shooter
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=376712


Utah Shooting, Good or Bad?
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=378204

Both threads were locked by Justin on July 17. The poll thread was locked because "FCFC, we've already got one thread going where you've obnoxiously let everyone know what you believe about this topic.We really don't need more of the same."

And the other "going" thread was locked 9 minutes later with the note: "I'm going to do FCFC a favor and put this thread out of its misery."


There is considerable discussion by many ("lively exchanges") in those threads and positions were taken. I will refer to some of the statements in those threads.

My positions on the HMS can be explained with the following two statements, made July 12 and July 16, respectively:

We don't even yet know exactly if the knapsack guy was reaching for anything. The report has been that he was perceived by someone (who?) to be reaching "inside his jacket or backpack." That's pretty vague. Which one was it? Was the guy just taking off his knapsack so he could attempt to fight bare knuckles with the private citizen who he was engaged with? Did he say something like, "I'm gonna get my gun from this here knapsack and shoot you now?" Just what did the knapsack guy do?

I don't think we know yet.

But we do know that the decedent had no weapon. That much we know.

Which increases the likelihood that it is a bad shoot. It's bad practice to go around shooting and killing a guy who has no weapon. People ask questions.

To stop the perceived threat, why didn't the big bad security guard just go and punch the guy in the mouth or something? Why did he have to shoot and kill the guy? Couldn't the the security guard have been a little more flexible in his continuum of force application?

Well, we don't know what the "threats" were, do we? What did Mike Mays actually say according to George Harrison and witnesses? There were witnesses.

Did Mays say: "You dirty so-and-so, I have a gun and I'm gonna pull it out and shoot you! Now!" Or, "You're George Harrison, you're DEAD!"

Or was it something else? Did he say, "What choo looking at boy? I'm gonna slap that look off your face?

Did Mays even mention a weapon at all?

The SLCPD watch commander said that Mays "intimated" that he was reaching for a weapon. But I don't know how that was done.

BTW, the reaching into something apparently was possibly not reaching into the knapsack. It's kind of unclear. References have been made to Mays reaching in to a) jacket pocket, b) knapsack, and c) pants pocket. Which one was it?

The SLCPD hasn't released that information yet. Nor have they released what words (threats) were spoken by Mays. It's been a week since the shooting and one would think this simple information release would've happened by now.

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to vote for Bad Shoot. I would change it if the SLCPD confirms that Mays actually did threaten Harrison in some way. My definition of a Bad Shoot is not only one which is found to be in violation of law in a criminal court but also one which results in charges, legal expenses, loss of liberty, pyschological trauma from the legal consequences, etc., if any or all of those things could have been avoided by some reasonable alternative to shooting in the first place. Keeping in mind, of course, the validity of acting in self-defense in the first place.

It's a tough call to come up with an informed opinion at the level of discussion forum analysis. But not really that tough. Any GJ proceeding, criminal charge adjudication, or civil court case would be far more complicated, of course.

This is Part 1--What my positions actually were. Kind of surprising when one actually reads them...


Parts 2 and 3 to follow.

 

[MJRW]

Heh. You think you're intelligent. That's funny.

 

[XD Fan]

Parts 2 & 3?

 

[Rugerlvr]

chirp, chirp.

 

[Rugerlvr]

You sure proved our point FCFC.

 

[Correia]

We hit him so hard he fell off the internet.

 

[camslam]

Correia wrote:

We hit him so hard he fell off the internet.

He is still on the net. But let me give you a taste of what had to say about this incident a few days ago on another internet forum. This will give you an idea of why he has nothing else to say.

I have never owned a gun, never shot one, never even touched one. Just my personal choice. My concern about guns goes back to the saying "if your only tool is a hammer, sooner or later everything looks like nails." I still fear that is what happened when Mr. Harrison shot and killed the homeless gentleman.

Can anyone say T-R-O-L-L. Old FCFC has plenty of posts, but who knows what his motivations are for getting into the High Road. In my humble opinion you are wasting your time and effort if you engage him in a conversation or read his posts. Your choice.

 

[Elza]

camslam

I can hardly wait to see his response to your latest post!!

 

[Intune]

A murder of crows and the FCFC dinner bell. Part 4.
OR, "good thing they don't have any tar, these dang feathers are everywhere..."

 

[Rugerlvr]

deleted, offtopic

 

[Justin]

Odd that we've not heard back from FCFC yet.

 

[Valkman]

He's hoping for a server crash and no more thread! That or for everyone to forget about it.

 

[DigitalWarrior]

Different but related: Is there merit in the idea of getting an account suspension for review from moderators if a person is "ignored" by 10 people?

 

[divemedic]

As a person who really didn't participate in the previous discussions, I have to say that FCFC was certainly wrong, but it seems like he is not willing to admit it. Just another anti-gun troll, I guess.

ETA: He certainly doesn't mind posting about it on other threads.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=4833613#post4833613

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I have never owned a gun, never shot one, never even touched one. Just my personal choice.

Afraid of them?

 

[romeo212000]

FCFC say he banned

 

[dogmush]

Yep, it appears we'll never get to hear the rest of his raving:

So now I'm going to ban you as a liar and a troll. We don't normally say why we ban people in public, but you've just been too darn entertaining for far too many of us.

Part of me is a little dissapointed, I enjoy different viewpoints, even if they're wrong.

But the rest of me understands, and I'm sure that he'll either rejoin under another name, or someone else will join to fill his place.

Remember FCFC:

"when the only tool you have is a keyboard, everything looks like a forum"