anyone ever get kicked off a field too?

[hitech]

Originally posted by WicKeD_WaYz
But I can say I have never seen someone shot in the adams apple from point blank. The key words there are point blank.

I do know someone who has. The barrel was touching his neck when the marker was fired. It was during the normal course of a game. He was fine, after an hour or so.

[shartley]

Originally posted by WicKeD_WaYz
Ive been shot in the throat.

Did I die?

No

Could I breathe?

No

But I can say I have never seen someone shot in the adams apple from point blank. the key words there are point blank.

[FatMan]

Re: Re: Why is violence the answer?

Originally posted by WicKeD_WaYz


I would consider myself pretty street smart because I know when to keep my mouth shut and not to challenge the wrong group of people. I probably do get in more fights than an average 17 year old but I know where to draw the line.

You have to understand though. I didnt get in his face looking to fight. I didnt even get in his face looking for a shoving match. I was just venting the frustration I had. HE was the one who stood up and brought the situation to the next level.

Wicked, I think we understood each other a few days ago. I should have made clear that at this point I'm writing more to the bone-heads who are posting here and think being a tough-nuts is so cool. I still think you should have let it go, but there is no point in arguing it.

What IS an issue is the numb-nuts here who think they know what they are talking about WRT the law. Some of you guys are train wrecks waiting to happen!

branman444, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. A carry permit means nothing in a situation like that, and IF you could get yourself off at all, you'd be looking to spend $20K or more on a successful defense - and it is not likely to be successful. The term isn't "self defense" it is "aggrivated." So you might go down on man slaughter rather than murder.

Albinonewt, you are just about as out there. If that story you told is true, then knocking the guy off your friend is one thing, the knife to the throat is jail time dude. If you think you could get out of it I hope you have the big bucks!

The lot of you need to grow up. Wicked came here and put his story up, and it was a great opportunity for everyone to learn.

I'm not sure there is much for you guys though!

Sheesh!

Further Deponent Sayeth Not!

FatMan

[cockermongol]

[shartley]

Originally posted by cockermongol

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by hitech


I should let this die, but I'm no good at ignoring things.

Lets see, I assumed you signed a waiver that stated people would be firing paintballs at you. In the normal course of play someone could have a paintball gun (not .68 caliber weapon) to your throat and fire, as a normal part of the game. Shoot someone with a firearm because they threatened you with a paintball gun on a paintball field during a game (regardless of whether you were out or not) and you will find yourself in jail. PERIOD. The caliber and speed of the paintball will be irrelevant.

I completely disagree with you. Here's an example.

You and I belong to a gymnastics class. We both sign a waiver conceding that we know we could get hurt there, with the fact that it's a physical activity and that there is equipment that could hurt us. While in class, you decide to choke me with a jump rope, just wrap it around my neck and tug. I get scared, and decide to use force to get you off me. I respond with enough force to injure you pretty severly (not throw you and then kick or anything, maybe a headbut to the nose or something). Was I justified? I think most people will agree I was. Did I sign a waiver saying I knew I could get hurt and then ignore it? Not really.

In the case of the guy with the paintball gun to anohter person's neck at point blank range threatening a guy with it, that is far and above what is considered normal play, and i think at that point force is justifiable. I personally would not start shooting a guy, but I would certain take corrective measures. And anybody that tried to nail me with the waiver would get an earful. I would simply state that I didn't understand, when signing that waiver, that the field thought I was telling them it was ok for people to TRY to harm me.

I wouldn't pull a gun in that situation, but I'm pertty sure you could get away with it. Especially if the guy was being threatening.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
In the case of the guy with the paintball gun to another person's neck at point blank range threatening a guy with it, that is far and above what is considered normal play

That is where we disagree. It easily could happen in normal play. I have seen it happen before. And remember, you are going to have to prove that you feared for your life if you use deadly force. Since I can produce huge amounts of evidence that it could happen as a normal part of the game that you agreed to play it's going to be very, very hard to convince anyone that you feared for your life. People get convicted with better "excuses" all the time.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Albinonewt


I completely disagree with you. Here's an example.

You and I belong to a gymnastics class. We both sign a waiver conceding that we know we could get hurt there, with the fact that it's a physical activity and that there is equipment that could hurt us. While in class, you decide to choke me with a jump rope, just wrap it around my neck and tug. I get scared, and decide to use force to get you off me. I respond with enough force to injure you pretty severly (not throw you and then kick or anything, maybe a headbut to the nose or something). Was I justified? I think most people will agree I was. Did I sign a waiver saying I knew I could get hurt and then ignore it? Not really.

In the case of the guy with the paintball gun to anohter person's neck at point blank range threatening a guy with it, that is far and above what is considered normal play, and i think at that point force is justifiable. I personally would not start shooting a guy, but I would certain take corrective measures. And anybody that tried to nail me with the waiver would get an earful. I would simply state that I didn't understand, when signing that waiver, that the field thought I was telling them it was ok for people to TRY to harm me.

I wouldn't pull a gun in that situation, but I'm pertty sure you could get away with it. Especially if the guy was being threatening.

[SP87]

geez 7 pages

every time i check my mail i see this again

[hitech]

Originally posted by shartley
watching LA Law, Hill Street Blues, and whatever other TV shows (and movies) is a bad way to learn the law.

What about Law and Order? I love that show! lol Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

[gam-e]

Originally posted by shartley

put put courses

oh i finally got something on you Mr.


i do believe its PUTT-PUTT.


geeze finally

Dion

[shartley]

Originally posted by gam-e



oh i finally got something on you Mr.


i do believe its PUTT-PUTT.


geeze finally

Dion

:)

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by hitech


That is where we disagree. It easily could happen in normal play. I have seen it happen before. And remember, you are going to have to prove that you feared for your life if you use deadly force. Since I can produce huge amounts of evidence that it could happen as a normal part of the game that you agreed to play it's going to be very, very hard to convince anyone that you feared for your life. People get convicted with better "excuses" all the time.

In normal course of play a guy can physically touch his barrel to my throat and threaten me with it?

Where do you play?

Although it is certainly a point that a person can be shot, nearly anywhere on the body, at close ranges in paintball that is also certainly different then to threaten me with harm, by pressing the gun to my throat and then threatening to fire.

I will elaborate in a moment, with Shartley

[WicKeD_WaYz]

Originally posted by shartley

I don’t want to misunderstand you….

You are saying that you think a paintball leaving a barrel at 280FPS and hitting you in the neck from point blank range is different than a paintball leaving the barrel at 280FPS and hitting you at 5 or 10 feet (common for bunkering moves). Interesting……….

I think we could argue that a paintball is at its fastest point when it leaves the barrel and then slows down the farther it travels. Even if it only slows down 30 or 40 fps, thats a big difference.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
In normal course of play a guy can physically touch his barrel to my throat and threaten me with it?

I didn't say anything about threatening. I said that in the normal course of play you could have a marker pointed point blank at (even touching) your throat and fired. If you would truly fear for your life in that situation, why do you play?

And yes, I have seen someone shot in the throat with the barrel touching their throat. The "victim", a friend of mine, confirmed it was touching when fired.