Greenwood Kroger cop plays intimidation card, draws no response.

[lovemachine]

So, WTF is a duck walk?

Um.... A normal guy will walk a little weird after having their butt hole invaded.

 

[jeremy]

So, WTF is a duck walk?

Huh...
I would have thought your all knowingness that you would have this answer already...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSR5RAeN9N8

 

[Benny]

Huh...
I would have thought your all knowingness that you would have this answer already...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSR5RAeN9N8

That's similar to what I could find, but couldn't find a video of two people "duck walking" someone...How does one(or two) "duck walk" someone?

 

[jeremy]

That's similar to what I could find, but couldn't find a video of two people "duck walking" someone...How does one(or two) "duck walk" someone?

That is your question...

In the Military I just Say Duck walk douchebag...

 

[drillsgt]

MEPS was no problem, it was later during basic when they gave us our shots and issued our gear that was a pita (literally). That antibiotic shot they gave us in the butt cheek felt like they stuck a golf ball in my buttocks...it hurt for days!

That's hilarious my current group of Privates here at Ft. Benning are always talking about that shot, not sure when you went through but it's apparantly still going strong.

 

[E5RANGER375]

That is your question...

In the Military I just Say Duck walk douchebag...

 

[jeremy]

That's hilarious my current group of Privates here at Ft. Benning are always talking about that shot, not sure when you went through but it's apparantly still going strong.

20+ years ago nd it felt like a shot of Peanut Butter in each cheek...
Still remember it...

 

[Dead Duck]

Originally Posted by Benny
So, WTF is a duck walk?

Um.... A normal guy will walk a little weird after having their butt hole invaded.

Hey - I think you should find another name for this.
I'm starting to pucker up.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Again, study up on the Reasonable Man Doctrine, because your assertions regarding the use of force are somewhat less than "reasonable", and if you followed through with what you said you'd do, you'd end up in jail or sued, and probably both, and you'd most likely lose in court on both ends.

Well every one has their own crystal ball...

 

[ThrottleJockey]

That's hilarious my current group of Privates here at Ft. Benning are always talking about that shot, not sure when you went through but it's apparantly still going strong.

USN '91 MEPS in Minneapolis then RTC Orlando followed by NTC Orlando....I made my recruiter guarantee me Orlando in writing. There is no way I was going to Great Lakes in Feb and Cali was closed for renovations at the time...When I got my orders at MEPS they said great lakes. I had a bit of insight though and knew that they didn't yet own me those orders were promptly returned and replaced with the correct travel papers. Oh, and I remember what the vial the injection came in said too, bi-cillin 1,000,000 units.

 

[thompal]

No, the litmus test is if a person intentionally ignores said sign. I'm not going to argue how the sign is posted.

And how is a bouncer supposed to know if I intentionally ignored the shorts sign, or simply didn't/couldn't read it?

 

[KG1]

You know the rodeo isn't a one man show. Lot's of people been there, a few more than once.

I'm no tuff guy that's why I'll make sure I don't need to be and this is all hypothetical for the main reason I'll never own a grocery store but it's not that far different from a lot of other things.

Warning on the door and told to get out, that's one extra. If I owned the store you would be messing with my money, making my job harder, and been warned at least once, may be twice, that's all it takes and the warnings and reactions vary with the mood I'm in but it get's bad pretty quick when those are involved. If I'm not happy on my own place you can bet the guy causing me to be unhappy is going to be as unhappy as I an all the help I can get can make them.

Look Jack, I've made some comments on this thread so i'm just gonna go ahead and speak my peace and be done with it. Somehow I think things get missconstrued and blown out of proportion. I myself and some of the other posts i've seen have been portrayed as wanting to be lawless armed thugs just running around looking to cause trouble and disrupt somebodys business and get into fights with property owners and refuse to leave when asked to do so. That couldn't be farther from the truth. I've never heard about anything like that being posted or have any personal knowledge of someone attempting to do so. Most of it boils down to a dissagreement on what constitutes a trespass and what does'nt. So I have a hard time getting why someone else on the other side of the issue just automatically feel the need to get all bent out of shape and feel it's justified going all hands on from the get go when in all reality it's not warrented or even nessecary. For the record, if you had a business, whether it's a hypothetical one or not, and you asked me to leave I would do so no questions asked because I know at that point if I did not then I would deffintly no doubt about it be subject to a trespassing charge.

 

[jbombelli]

Well every one has their own crystal ball...

Be a fool if you want. It's no skin off my nose.

I'm done with your inane foolishness.

 

[finity]

So I have a hard time getting why someone else on the other side of the issue just automatically feel the need to get all bent out of shape and feel it's justified going all hands on from the get go when in all reality it's not warrented or even nessecary.

You haven't read many of Jacks posts have you...?

He makes a career out of being angry & crotchety.

Not that he doesn't make some good points at times. It's just unfortunate that those points get overshadowed by all of his...well...anger & crotchetiness.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I will acknowledge that, IF, you acknowledge that if someone were to do that the party being tossed would be seeing a pay check in the future as well...

I can see that certainly happening... people sue for any and everything

 

[Kutnupe14]

It's not a legal option for enforcing your wishes, rules, posted policies, guidelines, etc.

There is a narrow allowance specifically for trespass:

...if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass.

It's not a catch-all get-out-of liability shield to mandle, duck walk or throw people on their faces when they don't treat your rules like laws.

Narrow? In what way? Trespass is trespass, and what exactly does reasonable force mean, if not physical contact?

I really have never seen so many "head in the sand" point of views in my life. The Indiana CODE, ie the LAW, states that a private citizen can use "reasonable" force to terminate trespassing. Indiana CODE, again the LAW, states that written notice can constitute a denial of entry. Notice meaning prior to the action taking place.
So one can easily infer that in a person is aware of a written "denial of entry," and chooses to ignore it, then some form of "force" (and yall can decide what that entails) is justified.
I'm not saying that a property owner can beat someone to a bloody pulp because they purposefully ignored a sign. However, the level of force used will be dictated by the offender, NOT the owner.

 

[Kutnupe14]

And how is a bouncer supposed to know if I intentionally ignored the shorts sign, or simply didn't/couldn't read it?

No idea, that why the signage must be well posted.

 

[KG1]

You haven't read many of Jacks posts have you...?

He makes a career out of being angry & crotchety.

Not that he doesn't make some good points at times. It's just unfortunate that those points get overshadowed by all of his...well...anger & crotchetiness.

None of that matters to me. I'm not easilly swayed by anger and crotchetiness. When I choose to engage in a dicussion I look for level ground and try to present a point of view without all the undue rhetoric and chest thumping that just ends up clouding the issue.

 

[Pocketman]

I find it interesting that some posts, with little initial substance, just keep on giving.

 

[youngda9]

Probably 18 USC s1385.

"1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. "


See Bolded part, does not apply here.