[Nuke]

People just need to relax.....



OBSERVE AND FEEL WARM AND FUZZY (unless you're Nuke, then you'll just see a couple of as-of-yet, unnuked targets)

blasphemy! kittens <3.
well maybe the dog, i dont like dogs.

[karajorma]

stuff

Let me ask you a couple of questions.

1) Why was the perp in the real version of the story uninjured?
2) Why don't policemen learn and use the same techniques?

[Klaustrophobia]

because (usually 1, maybe 2) police officers  != 4 marines?  and they are never laying in wait for the criminal directly in his/her escape route?

[jr2]

1) Marines are trained a little bit in reasonable force, however, in a situation where a deadly weapon is involved, I'm pretty sure most would just throw that right out the window (I would, at least until I was positive that the weapon wasn't a threat any more... you never know, the guy might be flying high as a kite on crack).

2) What do you mean?  Why don't policemen learn  combined martial arts, marine corps flavor designation: Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (MCMAP)?  I dunno, why don't they learn kung fu?  They aren't a SWAT team, they are law enforcement officers.  Why don't they learn to shoot a man-sized target in the chest using iron sights at 500 yards like we do?? (ok, they have switched to a 2X ACOG RCO since I went to boot)
EDIT: While I'm at it, why don't they also learn Table 2?  Shooting moving targets; rapid reload, dropping multiple targets, etc?

I'm sure they do learn some of these things, but they aren't trained primarily in the mission of the Marine Corps Rifle Squad:

To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver
-OR-
To repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat

[karajorma]

A knife was involved and already being brandished in the real situation. So I'm asking you again, why was the perp uninjured?

[jr2]

Maybe:

1) lucky

2) Not considered a real threat (feeling of invincibility by the Marines so no real fight / flight decision and no adrenaline spike

3) Marines may not have extensively trained in MCMAP... there is a middle area where you know enough to do serious damage, but not enough to effortlessly disarm most opponents that aren't also schooled in combat.  Since one Marine was injured, I'm guessing he may have been Tan or Gray belt.  I'm a Tan belt, the minimum required to graduate boot.  I took Gray belt in job school, but did not pass the test at the end of the course.  You know a lot of good moves, however, you don't really have a lot of real world experience implementing them in combat situations.

Now, if someone started swinging a knife around a Green belt, I'd say that unless the assailant was lucky or trained in martial arts, he's a goner.  Green belt teaches killing moves besides the axe stomp.  Brown and Black belt, he'd probably just find himself in some sort of wrist lock faster than he could blink, looking stupid and helpless as a kitten for when the cops show up.  Unless the perp successfully managed to make the Brown or Black belf feel sufficiently threatened that they decided to end him, in which case he'd end up 1) dead with a broken neck or crushed trachea or 2) flying through the air wondering how he was going to end up landing or 3) being flipped over the defender's back and smashed to the ground, hard, probably with a cracked skull.

Anywho, History had a documentary on MCMAP:

http://www.history.com/shows/human-weapon-archived/videos/human-weapon-marine-corps-martial-arts

(~45 min vid.)

[LordMelvin]

Maybe:

1) lucky

2) Not considered a real threat (feeling of invincibility by the Marines so no real fight / flight decision and no adrenaline spike

3) Marines may not have extensively trained in MCMAP... there is a middle area where you know enough to do serious damage, but not enough to effortlessly disarm most opponents that aren't also schooled in combat.  Since one Marine was injured, I'm guessing he may have been Tan or Gray belt...

Real Life events, to reiterate, since no-one else seems to care: Ijjit runs out of the store. (How he's running while holding two cameras, a couple games, and a knife without dropping things all over, I don't know, but anyway...) Noise of ijjit running alerts marines. One marine reaches out and clotheslines the ijjit. All marines then take the Ijjit down to the pavement, clear weapon, etc. First marine then notices that, 'hey, that Ijjit cut my shirt! Also, hey! I'm bleeding' Police arrive and remove Ijjit, who likely will feel sore as hell in the morning.

Put it together, it looks like the Ijjit was just an idiot.

2) What do you mean?  Why don't policemen learn  combined martial arts, marine corps flavor designation: Marine Corps Martial Arts Program (MCMAP)?  I dunno, why don't they learn kung fu?  They aren't a SWAT team, they are law enforcement officers.  Why don't they learn to shoot a man-sized target in the chest using iron sights at 500 yards like we do?? (ok, they have switched to a 2X ACOG RCO since I went to boot)
EDIT: While I'm at it, why don't they also learn Table 2?  Shooting moving targets; rapid reload, dropping multiple targets, etc?

I'm sure they do learn some of these things, but they aren't trained primarily in the mission of the Marine Corps Rifle Squad:

To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver
-OR-
To repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat

And speaking as a civilian, I think this is a good thing. When that policeman is angry about where a car was parked, I take a little bit of comfort in knowing that his training was oriented towards 'protect and serve' instead of 'destroy the enemy' because it means he's a lot less likely to kill people for minor misdemeanors.

[jr2]

I'm sure they do learn some of these things, but they aren't trained primarily in the mission of the Marine Corps Rifle Squad:

To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver
-OR-
To repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat

And speaking as a civilian, I think this is a good thing. When that policeman is angry about where a car was parked, I take a little bit of comfort in knowing that his training was oriented towards 'protect and serve' instead of 'destroy the enemy' because it means he's a lot less likely to kill people for minor misdemeanors.

This is true.  however, there is some comfort in that members of the U.S. Armed Forces, Marines included, are there to defend their country, and swear an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic".

The problem comes when a citizen makes himself the enemy.  The tools a Marine has to defend his country by destroying the enemy are a bit overkill for catching a criminal. 

[Mika]

I'm away for one week, return here, and see light-hearted thread mutated to a multi page argument of the old "what is justifiable in self-defence"? This was supposed to be a funny thread, guys...

What it comes to self-defence, it is always blurry. Whatever happens afterwards will mainly be decided by a court, recollecting some of these incidents accurately is almost impossible to begin with. I have been pretty close to getting to answer to court on two occasions, both of them perfectly justifiable and rational from my point of view, but due to limited amount of time to make the decisions (fractions of a second), possibly wrong as well.

Legislation related to it will be blurry as well, generally speaking in Europe the defendant might end up worse in the court than the assailant, if the defendant causes more damage than he has received. What I don't know is if they have considered the worst personalities with this.

[MP-Ryan]

I happen to disagree with you on the 5 second thing. Yes you can do that damage if you go in intending to do that damage. But as I keep stating you aren't allowed to go in intending to do that damage when making a citizen's arrest.

Maybe you're getting sloppy from arguing with everyone, but this statement is not true.

You are allowed to use reasonable, proportionate force to effect an arrest.  That is true for peace officers, and for non-peace officers.  A subject brandishing a knife at you with intent or stated willingness to use it (e.g. "I am going to stab you!") is using force intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm... which means you can use the same, less, or more force provided its reasonable.

I work in law enforcement and deal with these scenarios in training all the time.  I can promise you that anyone who pulls or has a knife out in my direction before or during the arrest (on duty as a peace officer or off-duty as a citizen is probably going to suffer injuries up to and including broken bones in the course of that arrest simply as a virtue of the force necessary to subdue that individual and ensure my safety - and the courts will back me on that 100%.  And in the course of does not mean these things happen unplanned.  If I have to deal with a subject holding a knife and refusing to drop it, my training has stuck a plan in my head that purposefully involves me cracking his arm bones with my defensive baton.  That's planned in advance, and its perfectly acceptable.  That's off-duty too, by the way, except it would involve using a weapon of convenience instead of the more efficient steel pipe work kindly provides me with.

A knife was involved and already being brandished in the real situation. So I'm asking you again, why was the perp uninjured?

Sheer dumb luck and/or negotiation.  A lesser level of force was chosen and worked, though that does not imply that a greater level of force would be illegal.

[karajorma]

Figured I might as well post this since it's amusing as hell.

Man gets arrested and charged (but not convicted) after being attacked by 20 nazis.