How would you have reacted?

[infidel]

Profiling sets you up for failure, it could be the time your judging the guy with a long shirt and baggy pants that you miss the guy all clean cut tucked in shirt white guy pulling his gun robbing the place or blowing your brains out.

Yeah and I don't wear my seat belt because sometime I might crash into a river a need to get out fast. I look at facts and statistics, sorry.

 

[ihateiraq]

would i be profiled because i have tattoos? my hair is cut fairly short, but when im home i rarely shave, so i look scruffy. i wear my pants on my hips, and never tuck my shirts in.

 

[GuyRelford]

I'm sure if you would have paid the attention necessary to gain all of the facts in the thread you would have the same amount of information that I had in the scenario.

Exactly. And most importantly, the fact that your "reaction" was not even noticible to anyone but YOU makes it inherently reasonable under the circumstances.

 

[redneckmedic]

Profiling sets you up for failure, it could be the time your judging the guy with a long shirt and baggy pants that you miss the guy all clean cut tucked in shirt white guy pulling his gun robbing the place or blowing your brains out. If you saw me you would probably profile me as a gangster type with my brown skin and non tight clothes (i dont sag, but my clothes are a little loose) depending if I'm at work or not. Point is profiling might cost you your life when your wrong. Question though, is it right for me to look at all middle aged white guys and assume their racist? As that has been my experience in the past. I dont do that cause I would miss out on a lot of good people. As you will.

I don't fail to see your point, but you are crossing definitions also. I look deeper into certain characters than others. And I am polite, courteous, and suspicious of almost everyone. My relationships have nothing to do with who I do and don't profile, I don't feel I've missed out on any good folk because of it. (although my name gives good suspect to profile me as well)

And the most important thing to remember, I didn't trail his behavior until after I saw an OC'd .357 at the cash register in a popular 'cash only' establishment in a questionable part of town.

Thanks for your input though, keep it coming!!!

 

[redneckmedic]

would i be profiled because i have tattoos? my hair is cut fairly short, but when im home i rarely shave, so i look scruffy. i wear my pants on my hips, and never tuck my shirts in.

Yes, I have already profiled you, of course a visual aide would have helped me.

 

[SC_Shooter]

Now that's just too funny!

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Good for you on exercising situational awareness , stay alert , stay alive .

I personally don't profile , men and women , pick your race / color , everybody's' suspect until I know them better .

 

[booey50]

you did good, all it takes is that one moment when you relax and by then it can be to late...

 

[GuyRelford]

Profiling sets you up for failure, it could be the time your judging the guy with a long shirt and baggy pants that you miss the guy all clean cut tucked in shirt white guy pulling his gun robbing the place or blowing your brains out. If you saw me you would probably profile me as a gangster type with my brown skin and non tight clothes (i dont sag, but my clothes are a little loose) depending if I'm at work or not. Point is profiling might cost you your life when your wrong. Question though, is it right for me to look at all middle aged white guys and assume their racist? As that has been my experience in the past. I dont do that cause I would miss out on a lot of good people. As you will.

I completely understand your point and agree with it - as far as it goes. But I think you're missing the most important part of Medic's original post - he said specifically that the man's appearance, combined with the visible .357 - was "no biggie." It was only the following that caused his very limited (and reasonable) reaction:

"As he walked up to pay both of his hands drop down to his sides, the left into his pocket and his right resting on his revolver's grip. When the cash register opened his right hand slid into the revolvers grip a little more towards the hammer......"

I'm a middle-aged white guy myself, but if I made the same movement in front of a cash register in any retail establishment, I wouldn't be offended in the least if someone with Medic's situational awareness had the very same, very limited reaction. To emphasize - he never even touched his own Glock. He just readied himself and paid attention. I can't find any fault in that.

 

[ihateiraq]

Yes, I have already profiled you, of course a visual aide would have helped me.

thats too funny. i often get questioned about my tattoos' "other meanings". of course there are no other meanings, but some people are stupid. excellent movie, by the way.

 

[infidel]

would i be profiled because i have tattoos? my hair is cut fairly short, but when im home i rarely shave, so i look scruffy. i wear my pants on my hips, and never tuck my shirts in.

Depends if there was anybody else/more .....suspicious isn't the word I'm looking for, but you catch my drift.....around at the time. Its not really a big deal, its just choosing a certain person to look at for a certain reason.

he never even touched his own Glock.

 

[Joe Williams]

I'm sure if you would have paid the attention necessary to gain all of the facts in the thread you would have the same amount of information that I had in the scenario.

The point remains the same. We rag on cops and sheeple for the MWAG = criminal until proven otherwise attitudes, but how can we do so if we automatically make the same assumption? Perhaps it's a thought that can provide some empathy for those around us, and find ways to minimize that.

 

[redneckmedic]

The point remains the same. We rag on cops and sheeple for the MWAG = criminal until proven otherwise attitudes, but how can we do so if we automatically make the same assumption? Perhaps it's a thought that can provide some empathy for those around us, and find ways to minimize that.

I am completely missing your point. He had a gun, no biggie, I noticed it, he put his hand on it when the attendant opened the cash register, I noticed and became prepared.

Not sure what any of the above rubbish has to do with the price of eggs?

 

[Joe Williams]

I completely understand your point and agree with it - as far as it goes. But I think you're missing the most important part of Medic's original post - he said specifically that the man's appearance, combined with the visible .357 - was "no biggie." It was only the following that caused his very limited (and reasonable) reaction:
snip.

Actually, it seems that the .357 was a "biggie," since he said it was the gun that caused him to take note:

And the most important thing to remember, I didn't trail his behavior until after I saw an OC'd .357 at the cash register in a popular 'cash only' establishment in a questionable part of town.

Now, keeping an eye on what and who is around us is vital, of course, and I've not said he did anything wrong. I am simply pointing out that perhaps we do not have a very firm leg to stand on if we also automatically assume gun carriers are more likely to be criminals than those that appear to be unarmed.

 

[ihateiraq]

theres nothing wrong w/ being wary of a person who has a gun. its an instrument of death. you just dont know what is going through someone elses head.

 

[infidel]

theres nothing wrong w/ being wary of a person who has a gun. its an instrument of death. you just dont know what is going through someone elses head.

 

[GuyRelford]

theres nothing wrong w/ being wary of a person who has a gun. its an instrument of death. you just dont know what is going through someone elses head.

And THAT is the point!

 

[GuyRelford]

Actually, it seems that the .357 was a "biggie," since he said it was the gun that caused him to take note:



Now, keeping an eye on what and who is around us is vital, of course, and I've not said he did anything wrong. I am simply pointing out that perhaps we do not have a very firm leg to stand on if we also automatically assume gun carriers are more likely to be criminals than those that appear to be unarmed.

Wth all respect, you're making a leap in logic that isn't justiified under Medic's original scenario. "Tracking" someone with a gun and assuming he is a criminal are two very different things. Situational awareness simply dictates that someone with a gun deserves increased attention. No other "assumptions" are necessary.

 

[Metro 40]

theres nothing wrong w/ being wary of a person who has a gun. its an instrument of death. you just dont know what is going through someone elses head.

This is completely lost on some people, but it absolutely true.

 

[redneckmedic]

Wth all respect, you're making a leap in logic that isn't justiified under Medic's original scenario. "Tracking" someone with a gun and assuming he is a criminal are two very different things. Situational awareness simply dictates that someone with a gun deserves increased attention. No other "assumptions" are necessary.

It't not necessary to indulge Joe anymore, he's just cranky b/c he got ran off the road yesterday in his own thread and is accusing me in driving the "bandwagon".

I forgive him, and now moving on.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...estions/51554-ingo_haven_for_profitteers.html