Lorenzo Clerkley Shooting

Fullauto223cal's picture

Lorenzo Clerkley shooting

I figured I'd post this before the other guy with a chip on his shoulder.

 

From the video it's pretty damn obvious from the sound that the pistol was not an actual firearm.

0
No votes yet

Comments

sal9000's picture
Master Mind

not relating to this but at what distance would you be able to visually distinguish a non-standard pistol from a not allowed to open carry rifle? taking into consideration all the different types of pistols it could be, all the different aftermarket parts, and now, the ability to cnc or 3d print parts and possible adapters to start mix and matching products from different companies?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

You don't need to visually distinguish a pistol if the person is actually using it.  Firearms have very distinct reports, even a .22 caliber pistol is much louder than a CO2 BB gun.  The cop even says around the 46 second mark "I think it's a cap gun."  Well no shit Sherlock.

There is no such thing as a "non-standard pistol".  Unconventional perhaps.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

first 4 words of my comment. "not relating to this"

 

i was bringing up "non-standard pistol" because you used it a month ago.

"It would have been a decent idea to give them a heads up you'll be opening carrying a non-standard pistol in public.  You never know if one of the cops responding is going to be cowardly bitch like Phillip Brailsford and plug your ass for no good god damn reason."

 

so i was wondering. based on visual distinction. at what distance could you distinguish a non-standard pistol which would be totally legal to open carry, from a rifle or assault weapon that might not be legal to open carry. taking into consideration all the shit i wrote the first time.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

Hey danmanjones, did you change the site coding?  It now stretches across the entire screen where it use to be limited to just the middle.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

yeah, do you like it or nah?

 

It was an adjustment aimed at the home page for wide desktop layouts (it now does a 5-column layout on 1080p screens) but then it got a bit carried away & I just went with it. I just use the browser zoom to adjust as needed but it may look a bit fucky in some setups. I wanna get the layout a bit nicer, any suggestion is appreciated. There's a comment at the bottom of this page for discussing it: [link]

 

I started messing with the header & then ran outa time so it's kind of halfway atm. What I wanna do is make the header more narrow & make the video larger, & hopefully get the video to adjust to the size of your screen, so it's as large as possible. I know the content pages now can look a bit lame right now but you can use zoom (ctrl + mouse scroll) to adjust.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

"non-standard pistol"  You are right, I did use that terminolgy.  I should have employed better wording.  My bad.  I'm so use to being on the look out for dishonest language from anti-gunners, I just pounced on that phrase.

 

so i was wondering. based on visual distinction. at what distance could you distinguish a non-standard pistol which would be totally legal to open carry, from a rifle or assault weapon that might not be legal to open carry. taking into consideration all the shit i wrote the first time.

 

OK, gonna have to call you out again.  The term "assault weapon" is a false, intentionally misleading term specificlly created by the Violence Policy Center to confuse the general public in to assuming AR-15s were identical to machineguns in order to garner support for Federal anti-gun legislation.

 

As far as the distance, if we're talking about an airsoft gun then it's suppose to have an orange tip on the barrel.  So pretty far I guess.  If we're talking about BB guns then you'd need to be right up on it as the one's I found shopping around online do not have orange tips.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

again. this has nothing to do with bb guns.

 

i also said rifle and you skipped right over it. how many firearms are not legal to open carry? how many companies make legal open carry varients of those firearms? at what distance could you visually dinstinguish between a legal and illegal open carry versions?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

More guns would solve this by making it more likely the gun was real because of the sheer number of guns rather than a cap gun.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

The cops seem to genuinely panic in pretty much all of these videos. The way they act, what they say, how they say it... they're scared shitless.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

i think the common theme is that other countries have proper gun laws in place. in canada, if i told you i had a gun. you know that its registered, i have a gun license, the gun is at home. its in a gun safe/locker and it has a trigger lock on it. the ammo is store seperatly. and nobody has a concealed carry or an open carry permit.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

This 14 year old wasn't using an actual firearm.  He was plinking with a BB gun.  Your retarded ass draconian gun laws wouldn't have done jack shit.  As a matter of fact, California, New York and New Jersey have the exact gun laws you propose and innocent people still get shot in those States.  So spare me.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

first, my comment was to one that danman changed before i hit submit.

 

anyhow. you dont need a licence for a long rifle in those 3 states, 2 of them you don't need a license for handguns. 2 of them have open carry. doesn't really sound like the exact same gun laws. we also have laws regarding bb guns, air guns... can't open carry them, or use them in town, unless its at a range. if its a replica, and looks too much like a real gun. its illegal.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

You are completely missing the point.  But if you are looking for a State that requires a license to own a firearm then look no further than Illinois.  The greater point is that if we agree the goal is to reduce violence, then the laws you are advocating do not accomplish that goal.  The ONLY thing your proposed law do is create a more easily victimized citizenry.

 

I've completely avoided just pointing to the 2nd Amendment.  It exists for a reason and I keep giving you those reasons but you cling to your notion that the Government can STOP crimes with laws.  This is called a false idea of utility.

--------------------------

A principal source of errors and injustice are false ideas of utility. For example: that legislator has false ideas of utility who considers particular more than general conveniencies, who had rather command the sentiments of mankind than excite them, who dares say to reason, "Be thou a slave;" who would sacrifice a thousand real advantages to the fear of an imaginary or trifling inconvenience; who would deprive men of the use of fire for fear of their being burnt, and of water for fear of their being drowned; and who knows of no means of preventing evil but by destroying it.

 

The laws of this nature are those which forbid to wear arms, disarming those only who are not disposed to commit the crime which the laws mean to prevent. Can it be supposed, that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, and the most important of the code, will respect the less considerable and arbitrary injunctions, the violation of which is so easy, and of so little comparative importance? Does not the execution of this law deprive the subject of that personal liberty, so dear to mankind and to the wise legislator? and does it not subject the innocent to all the disagreeable circumstances that should only fall on the guilty? It certainly makes the situation of the assaulted worse, and of the assailants better, and rather encourages than prevents murder, as it requires less courage to attack unarmed than armed persons.

 

- Cesare Beccaria's Essay on Crimes and Punishments, originally published in Italian in 1764

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

you don't register your firearms in illinois, not the same as canada.

not reading the rest.

 

its an invisible border that seperates our countries. we have stricter gun laws. we have less shootings. if i asked you to list the last 10 school shootings you'd be in jan of this year. if i listed the last 10 in canada. i would stop at 7. thats all of them. if its not the guns laws keeping it down is it the invisible border?

 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Oh and not a single school shooting in europe this year, one in the last 10 years..... 

 

Yeah gun control doesn't work.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
stokkebye's picture

HA, thats funny, I was in Toronto last year for Canada Day and there was a drive by shooting that occured, a guy I got talking with works in a youth outreach program for the city and he told me there have been numerous drive by's and shooting hapening all around the city. So, tell me, did they all have gun permits and storing their guns safely at home as you suggest? Or do the fucking laws not work for people intent on obtaining guns and using them regardless of what stupid laws are in place. Also, all the school shootings in America happened in "gun-free zones", so if the law says they could not possess a gun on school campus, how did they have a gun? Take a think at that.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000's picture
Master Mind

dude, all of America is a "murder-free zone", so if the law says no murder, how did they murder? Take a think at that.

 

i never said laws would stop shootings, i said stricter laws have less shootings. if you're held criminally and financially responsible for the carnage your gun might cause, you might think twice about who has access to it. in some states, private sales require no background check. farts in the wind

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

two reasons - first is that they're taught to be scared now. going back quite a few years ago now states suffering low revenues started shortening their training programs and closing police academies, and now most have completely ended their police training programs, as in with veteran police teaching rookies how to be cops. instead the police training programs are run by defense personnel (usually army) because they're provided free by the national government. army staff teach police officers how to stay safe and not get killed, and that's it.

second reason sal has already explained very well.

it's almost completely not the fault of cops. they've been thrown into a shitty situation with an overabundance of danger, and haven't been properly trained or equipped to do the job that's asked of them.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

Yep, that's the issue.  Instead of approaching the situation and using obvious clues to assess the threat, which in this case would be (1) the sound of a CO2 BB gun, (2) the lack of sounds indicating people are in danger like screaming.  He just walks up, sees "a gun" and open fire.

 

Think motherfucker!

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

From this and many other videos it is VERY clear that US cops are not properly assessed before entering the force neither are they properly trained, a big enough ego seems to do. In Germany for example you have to train for a minumum of 2,5 years to become a police officer, if you fail during this time you are out (there are other flaws in the german system though, but this is beside the point).

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down