Friend of US servicemen describes terrifying attack on European train

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
Three men beating someone unconscious is not a "hero" to me. Regardless to what they have done they could have restrained him without beating. Let the judicial system do the punishment.

But I guess a judge, jury,and executioner is a "hero" now...

Holy crap.. ISIS account here..

[snipped]

Good job to these guys. They should have taken a picture like hunters do.

a reply to: Bundy

[snipped]
good on those guys kicking the crap out of him, hope they put him into a hospital

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
Three men beating someone unconscious is not a "hero" to me. Regardless to what they have done they could have restrained him without beating. Let the judicial system do the punishment.

But I guess a judge, jury,and executioner is a "hero" now...

[snipped] The guy second guessing three men in a deadly and fast developing situation. [snipped]
Hopefully they prosecute these men for viciously beating this innocent gunman.

REMINDER!!!!

You are responsible for your own posts.

Community Announcement re: Decorum

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

People love not reading things before they post don't they in order to try to gain the upper hand through ignorance.

These guys disarmed him, THEN beat him unconscious... So to all of you how is he going to get back up and start shooting people when they already had the gun in their possession?

A 120lb. correctional officer is trained to efficiently subdue a criminal on their own. Yet three man cannot pin down one guy? Why do they need handcuffs or zip ties to do so when all they have to do is use their weight? And pressure point techniques to assure that he will not get up.

So sounds like more rage than heroism to me.

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
REMINDER!!!!

You are responsible for your own posts.

Community Announcement re: Decorum

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

You do understand that by censoring comments that express what people feel about support been giving to a person who would of killed 100s of men women and children, you are supporting this terrorists in his actions.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
People love not reading things before they post don't they in order to try to gain the upper hand through ignorance.

These guys disarmed him, THEN beat him unconscious... So to all of you how is he going to get back up and start shooting people when they already had the gun in their possession?

A 120lb. correctional officer is trained to efficiently subdue a criminal on their own. Yet three man cannot pin down one guy? Why do they need handcuffs or zip ties to do so when all they have to do is use their weight? And pressure point techniques to assure that he will not get up.

So sounds like more rage than heroism to me.

Terrorists often carry remote detonators, the only way to make sure a bomb is not detonated is to render him unable to detonate it, fastest way is to shoot him, other way knock him unconscious. The 3 brave men showed wonderful restraint.

a reply to: imod02

Did he have a bomb? No, he did not. After tackling him all they had to do is contort his hands behind his back and he would be incapacitated. Did the national guardsman not learn this when he was being trained?

We could sit here all day and start talking what ifs.

a reply to: TheLotLizard

Depending on their mos there is a real chance they did not receive hand to hand combat training.

They tackled him he pulled out a box cutter and started hacking on one of them... They beat an armed man unconscious, not a helpless person.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: TheLotLizard

Depending on their mos there is a real chance they did not receive hand to hand combat training.

They tackled him he pulled out a box cutter and started hacking on one of them... They beat an armed man unconscious, not a helpless person.

For the National Guard every soldier is put through hand to hand combat training within three weeks of beginning basic training.

The gunman had no shirt on and tight pants so there was almost no chance of him carrying a bomb on himself. So that excuse goes out the window.

Im not saying they should not have done anything, but they took it too far. If you watch the video they had a makeshift restraint on him, so three men and everyone else on the train could have subdued him without making him unconscious.

That is my point, nothing more and nothing less.

Also no one can call him a terrorist YET because he may and may not be a terrorist. He is not YET confirmed to be part of any political group to be deemed one. People need to understand the term before they post it. The french themselves are even being cautious about calling this an act of terrorism.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
a reply to: imod02

Did he have a bomb? No, he did not. After tackling him all they had to do is contort his hands behind his back and he would be incapacitated. Did the national guardsman not learn this when he was being trained?

We could sit here all day and start talking what ifs.

That is the most childish answer I have read for a very very long time, you must be truly getting desperate , the fact that you have been trained to influence social forums is very clear,shown by how you answer and cheery pick other peoples words, how ever so is the poor level of your training

a reply to: TheLotLizard

You've never been in that situation and neither have I.

Those people were. Their top priority was, "Stop him, keep people safe". It was to neutralise the threat. And make sure that threat is NO LONGER a threat.

Beating him unconscious was needed, 100%. They didn't know what else he could have done.

Your pity for this terrorist makes me wonder what you would have done. No doubt give him tea and hand his gun back while apologising for trampling on his "rights"

TBH, i think you made that initial post to be controversial/trolling and now you've backed yourself into a corner, you don't know how to get out...

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
Three men beating someone unconscious is not a "hero" to me. Regardless to what they have done they could have restrained him without beating. Let the judicial system do the punishment.

But I guess a judge, jury,and executioner is a "hero" now...

LMAO. If you were on the train you would have been willing to be shot rather than hurt that poor misunderstood individual with a gun, is that right?
That sucker is lucky he was only unconscious.
In my mind the best way to neutralize a threat is to kill it.
That way they don't get out after a short sentence and successfully carry out another attack and kill dozens of innocent people.

The real world is a harsh place.
You don't want to be a victim or some nut like this guy.

a reply to: noonebutme

Beating him unconscious was not 100% needed. So you know my life story now do you? I have been assaulted at gunpoint before. You know what i did? Disarmed him and did not need the feeling of knocking him out. Why? Because i had his gun! How was he any more of a threat to me when all i had to do is pull the trigger. I could have, but that would put me on the same level as him.

Turned the gun in and turns out he was the owner and is behind bars without the need to kill/hurt him.

Pity for a "terrorist"? I never did say i am siding with the gunman. My whole point is that these men are not my heroes, but i guess that makes me a "terrorist".

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: DAVID64

'm not going to do the "Rah Rah Americans did it!"

since you wont i will.. RAH-RAH-RAH .. How about them American heros savings dozens of peoples lives.

Good ol American heros.... Did I mention it was American men that saved all those lives on that train?

America F### YEAH...

You missed the undoubtable presence of an Englishman they had to back them up.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Neutralizing a threat by killing it? Sounds like two guys i know, Hitler and Stalin.

Worked for them right?

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Neutralizing a threat by killing it? Sounds like two guys i know, Hitler and Stalin.

Worked for them right?

First you were playing devil's advocate...
& I understood your approach...
Now your being slightly ridiculous.

You have no idea what it was like in the heat of the moment.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
a reply to: noonebutme

Beating him unconscious was not 100% needed.

Agreed.
I have no issues with them beating him up though, he wanted to kill people and he got a bit of a kicking as a result.
Decent outcome as far as I see it.
...it's easy to be all holier than though while sat at a keyboard.