Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 4:18 am
Worse would be to miss and hit a bystander, then have your 250 target introduced as evidence that you don't miss even under stress, so it must have been intentional.
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
The way it's written in the law is the way it's pretty much done. http://tinyurl.com/qwnagstevie_d_64 wrote: BTW, and instructor question...
Does the State say you have to start the qualifier with the 3 yard plan???
I'd almost like to see it start at the 15 yard point and work your way in closer...Might make for some interesting results...
Just an early morning thought...
I would have to tell the intelligent lawyer that shooting targets and shooting at idiots like his client is two very different things. Targets are not trying to cause me harm.9mmGuy wrote:they didn’t even tell us our score much less take a pic of the target! It was just pass or fail. They said it was for legal issues...
Lawyer: "Wow, you shot a perfect score. If your such a good marks man, why didnt you just shoot the gun/knife out of my clients hand?" or “Why didnt you shoot them in the arm/leg, to just wound them?�
Texbow wrote:I would have to tell the intelligent lawyer that shooting targets and shooting at idiots like his client is two very different things. Targets are not trying to cause me harm.9mmGuy wrote:they didn’t even tell us our score much less take a pic of the target! It was just pass or fail. They said it was for legal issues...
Lawyer: "Wow, you shot a perfect score. If your such a good marks man, why didnt you just shoot the gun/knife out of my clients hand?" or “Why didnt you shoot them in the arm/leg, to just wound them?�
Yeah, but the jury doesnt know that...Texbow wrote:I would have to tell the intelligent lawyer that shooting targets and shooting at idiots like his client is two very different things. Targets are not trying to cause me harm.9mmGuy wrote:they didn’t even tell us our score much less take a pic of the target! It was just pass or fail. They said it was for legal issues...
Lawyer: "Wow, you shot a perfect score. If your such a good marks man, why didnt you just shoot the gun/knife out of my clients hand?" or “Why didnt you shoot them in the arm/leg, to just wound them?�
Charles L. Cotton wrote:Every so often I have to post something like this. Each time I try to be as polite and statesman-like as I can; not this time. Personal attacks will not be tolerated, I don't care who is doing it. Personal attacks obviously include derogatory or inflammatory comments about someone, but they also include insinuations that a poster is lying. Come on folks, we all know when someone is "getting in someone's face" so don't do it. We are all old enough to know that often it's not what was said, but how it was said that causes the problem.
Chas.
You might be right, common sense has almost become extinct.9mmGuy wrote:Yeah, but the jury doesnt know that...Texbow wrote:I would have to tell the intelligent lawyer that shooting targets and shooting at idiots like his client is two very different things. Targets are not trying to cause me harm.9mmGuy wrote:they didn’t even tell us our score much less take a pic of the target! It was just pass or fail. They said it was for legal issues...
Lawyer: "Wow, you shot a perfect score. If your such a good marks man, why didnt you just shoot the gun/knife out of my clients hand?" or “Why didnt you shoot them in the arm/leg, to just wound them?�