Deescalation

F

FastLane

Verified User
My conceal carry class had a segment on deescalation while you are carrying a weapon. It looks like Pretti skipped that part of what ever kind of conceal carry course he took. Does this look like deescalation to you. Pretti was clearly out of control. He wanted a violent confrontation. He got what he was asking for.



Liberal are bat guano crazy.

:facepalm:
 
FastLane said:
My conceal carry class had a segment on deescalation while you are carrying a weapon. It looks like Pretti skipped that part of what ever kind of conceal carry course he took. Does this look like deescalation to you. Pretti was clearly out of control. He wanted a violent confrontation. He got what he was asking for.



Liberal are bat guano crazy.

:facepalm:
Click to expand...
You arrest and try him.....you dont execute him on the streets.
 
I think Pretti fucked up in deciding to resist arrest. He did it before, and that time got away with it. That would embolden him to try it again. The second time, with pepper spray flying and multiple cops struggling with him all it took was one of the officers seeing his gun and yelling, "Gun, gun, gun!" and for another officer, possibly with pepper spray effecting his vision, to take action and use lethal force in the confusion of the moment.

Pretti set himself up for failure by resisting arrest. That is the key issue here. Had he not done that, not struggled and fought the cops, he wouldn't have been shot because the situation wouldn't have spun out of control like it did.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I think Pretti fucked up in deciding to resist arrest. He did it before, and that time got away with it. That would embolden him to try it again. The second time, with pepper spray flying and multiple cops struggling with him all it took was one of the officers seeing his gun and yelling, "Gun, gun, gun!" and for another officer, possibly with pepper spray effecting his vision, to take action and use lethal force in the confusion of the moment.

Pretti set himself up for failure by resisting arrest. That is the key issue here. Had he not done that, not struggled and fought the cops, he wouldn't have been shot because the situation wouldn't have spun out of control like it did.
Click to expand...
This sums it up pretty well.... In situations like that , everything does happen so fast.... Lots of poor choices that day 😕
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I think Pretti fucked up in deciding to resist arrest. He did it before, and that time got away with it. That would embolden him to try it again. The second time, with pepper spray flying and multiple cops struggling with him all it took was one of the officers seeing his gun and yelling, "Gun, gun, gun!" and for another officer, possibly with pepper spray effecting his vision, to take action and use lethal force in the confusion of the moment.

Pretti set himself up for failure by resisting arrest. That is the key issue here. Had he not done that, not struggled and fought the cops, he wouldn't have been shot because the situation wouldn't have spun out of control like it did.
Click to expand...
Well said T.A.
 
FastLane said:
If Pretti practiced deescalation he would be alive today.
Click to expand...
He was doing what people who sit behind cameras tell him to do. The false equivalence of "going to a protest" with Rittenhouse is interesting to me.... He was there to protect people against the "mostly peaceful" protesters who were burning and damaging property and attacking people, he did not "go to a protest with a gun", he volunteered to protect some private property from damage.

Now, those idiots who open carried at an Obama speech... Those ones "showed up at a protest with a gun"... somewhat equivalent. Nobody was kicking out the lights on vehicles, blocking his road, blowing whistles at the cops, trying to make them unable to arrest child traffickers and rapists by having police refuse to work with Federal Law Enforcement causing them to have to "raid" houses, etc. and to send enough agents to provide their own security to boot... but at least those guys showed up "to a protest" open carrying.
 
Having a gun on you increases your responsibility to remain in control of your emotions. In Texas you can't have a blood alcohol is 0.08% because being drunk can effect your ability to control your emotions. So you have an additional level of responsibility when you carry a weapon to keep your emotions in check. I suspect Pretti felt carrying a gun gave him a sense of power and made him into a badass. That is probably why he felt empowered to go after ICE physically.
 
evince said:
The evidence proves you are dense

He NEVER BRANDISHED HIS WEAPON ASS HAT
Click to expand...
He didn't have to. Having it on his person is possession. If one officer saw the gun as they struggled with Pretti, who was RESISTING ARREST, and that officer started yelling "Gun!" then the other officers present would take that to mean Pretti had a gun and was a lethal threat. That one other officer, who likely couldn't in the confusion of the moment, see that gun clearly or where it was and decided to use lethal force then he was justified in doing so because as far as he knew Pretti had a gun and was a threat AS PRETTI CONTINUED TO RESIST ARREST AND FIGHT VIOLENTLY WITH THE OTHER OFFICERS.
 
Damocles said:
He was doing what people who sit behind cameras tell him to do. The false equivalence of "going to a protest" with Rittenhouse is interesting to me.... He was there to protect people against the "mostly peaceful" protesters who were burning and damaging property and attacking people, he did not "go to a protest with a gun", he volunteered to protect some private property from damage.

Now, those idiots who open carried at an Obama speech... Those ones "showed up at a protest with a gun"... somewhat equivalent. Nobody was kicking out the lights on vehicles, blocking his road, blowing whistles at the cops, trying to make them unable to arrest child traffickers and rapists by having police refuse to work with Federal Law Enforcement causing them to have to "raid" houses, etc. and to send enough agents to provide their own security to boot... but at least those guys showed up "to a protest" open carrying.
Click to expand...
Rittenhouse was within the letter of the law but he was a moron to do what he did. I mean a 17 year old carrying an AR 15 in the middle of a BLM riots? What could possibly go wrong.

Pretti was not carrying legally. And physically resting arrest while armed? What could possibly go wrong?

Rittenhouse was 17 so he was a stupid kid. Pretti was 37 and was acting like a stupid kid.
 
Damocles said:
He was doing what people who sit behind cameras tell him to do. The false equivalence of "going to a protest" with Rittenhouse is interesting to me.... He was there to protect people against the "mostly peaceful" protesters who were burning and damaging property and attacking people, he did not "go to a protest with a gun", he volunteered to protect some private property from damage.

Now, those idiots who open carried at an Obama speech... Those ones "showed up at a protest with a gun"... somewhat equivalent. Nobody was kicking out the lights on vehicles, blocking his road, blowing whistles at the cops, trying to make them unable to arrest child traffickers and rapists by having police refuse to work with Federal Law Enforcement causing them to have to "raid" houses, etc. and to send enough agents to provide their own security to boot... but at least those guys showed up "to a protest" open carrying.
Click to expand...
Thanks for shrinking to the level of defending the jack booted thugs
 
FastLane said:
Rittenhouse was within the letter of the law but he was a moron to do what he did. I mean a 17 year old carrying an AR 15 in the middle of a BLM riots? What could possibly go wrong.

Pretti was not carrying legally. And physically resting arrest while armed? What could possibly go wrong?

Rittenhouse was 17 so he was a stupid kid. Pretti was 37 and was acting like a stupid kid.
Click to expand...
Why are you denying the gun rights that exist in that STATE

THESE RIGHT WING CLUCKS WILL GLEEFULLY HAND OVER THEIR FIREPOWER TO THE KING

They abandoned every priority they EVER claimed

So much so

The NRA has bailed on their desires to be slaves like these ass pudding minions
 
T. A. Gardner said:
He didn't have to. Having it on his person is possession. If one officer saw the gun as they struggled with Pretti, who was RESISTING ARREST, and that officer started yelling "Gun!" then the other officers present would take that to mean Pretti had a gun and was a lethal threat. That one other officer, who likely couldn't in the confusion of the moment, see that gun clearly or where it was and decided to use lethal force then he was justified in doing so because as far as he knew Pretti had a gun and was a threat AS PRETTI CONTINUED TO RESIST ARREST AND FIGHT VIOLENTLY WITH THE OTHER OFFICERS.
Click to expand...
Hand over your fire power want to be slave
 
evince said:
Why are you denying the gun rights that exist in that STATE

THESE RIGHT WING CLUCKS WILL GLEEFULLY HAND OVER THEIR FIREPOWER TO THE KING

They abandoned every priority they EVER claimed

So much so

The NRA has bailed on their desires to be slaves like these ass pudding minions
Click to expand...
To exercise your right to carry a concealed gun in Minnesota you have to carry your ID and your conceal carry license on your person. Pretti did not do that so he was carrying a gun illegally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top