View Single Post
Old 02-03-2010, 12:23   #20
Senior Member
dahahn's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 153
Originally Posted by TexasFats View Post
Again, to repeat my first point, the best way to have handled this situation would have been to go home before the bars closed.
I mean no offense, but I take issue with responses like this. The fact of the matter is that "the situation" is exactly what panned out. At the time of the shooting there was no option to go back in time and head out of the bar before 230am. Therefore leaving the bar before 230am isn't a solution to this situation at all. It's like saying the solution to our wars abroad (currently) is to make 9/11 not happen at all. Fact of the matter is that it happened, so we have to take the situation for what it is. Following your solution we learn nothing and take away nothing from a situation that has a wealth of information to be had.

That aside: should he have been out at 230am? Who knows? It's very possible that he has been out at those hours before, and perceived no threat like he encountered. There wasn't a shooting because it was 230am; there was a shooting because Mr. Ung registered a threat to his well-being. His response would have been the same at any time of day. If alcohol was involved, then we could just as easily say that the "victim" shouldn't have been drinking at all, and this wouldn't have happened.

Second, this situation points out the necessity of having more than one response available--something like pepper spray or a taser.
Very true. No matter your other point(s), you're dead on here. I need to make this investment myself. Could save me tens of thousands in court costs.
dahahn is offline   Reply With Quote