Special Ops Paintball: Bunker or surrender? - Special Ops Paintball

Jump to content


  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Bunker or surrender? Rate Topic: -----

Poll: Would you rather.. (84 member(s) have cast votes)

bunker or surrender?

  1. Bunker (63 votes [75.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 75.00%

  2. Surrender (21 votes [25.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#46 User is offline   ghostinthewood 

  • ELITE Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Retired/Inactive Moderator
  • Posts: 5,414
  • Joined: 22-September 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dub Town, IN
  • Brigade Name:GHOSTINTHEWOOD AKA SERAPH

Posted 14 May 2007 - 03:10 PM

View PostSpectre014, on May 13 2007, 11:13 AM, said:

I saw the topic and thought Id make a poll about it. Would you rather bunker someone or make them surrender? Personally I would rather bunker someone. It keeps the game going and you dont get noobs turning around and shooting you after you tell them to surrender.

Depends on the situation. If I'm being a ninja then I'm going to get people to surrender. However if theres a gun battle goin on I'm not going to get shot because Im a nice guy.
<a href="http://www.specialopspaintball.com/brigade/member_view.asp?id=3077" target="_blank"><img src="http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b392/Serapiel2/GITW1.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" /></a>
Guerillas arent endangered, they're just hard to find...sXe
"I dont think you're supposed to call you're girlfriend a n00b..." ~ robin 1:20pm 12/24/08
<3 robin
<a href="http://www.makeittosunday.com/" target="_blank">http://www.makeittosunday.com/</a>
(22:08:48) T-Freak : hey dont laugh at me...im just a dumb pentacostal morman
0

#47 User is offline   Traakon 

  • I came I saw, I ...wait...what was the question?
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chandler, Az
  • Brigade Name:Traakon

Posted 14 May 2007 - 03:24 PM

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 02:25 PM, said:

Let's assume that the surrender rule is in effect at that field. Not an unreasonable assumption for an indoor field with renters playing. If we're going under the assumption that shooting someone with a paintball is assault outside of the game, and someone is outside the game when they break the rules, then the kid shooting the surrenderer would have broken the rules and, therefore, been outside the game. So, the surrenderer is actually acting in self defense.
Now, I know that's a ridiculous point to make. But my point is that calling this 'assault' is bull.


OK, I’m going to go slow because I know how what people read translates differently when it reaches their brain. From the video we saw, the older kid was not defending himself and not in any personal danger. He took a deliberate shot at close range with intent to injure…That’s assault. We can only go by what was seen in the video and that’s what it showed.

Quote

So, you advocate your nephew shooting someone 3 times at point-blank when he's getting surrendered, but if someone shoots back, the guy shooting back is suddenly the bad guy?
EDIT: AND HOW THE HELL IS YOU BEATING THE PERSON ANY BETTER THEN WHAT HE DID? HELL, IT'S CONSIDERABLY WORSE! You call other players violent and draconian in the same post that you say you'd gladly harm them! What the hell kind of rationalization and good example for your nephew is that?


Where in the heck did you get that I was going to “beat this kid up”? That may be how you think, but it is not how I think and it damn sure is not how I handle situations. You superimposed your own vision of retaliation on my post which specifically mentioned involving the proper authorities i.e “Guys in Blue.”

Quote

3 deliberate, slow shots is just as cruel as the other guy shooting the kid in the nuts. Shooting the kid in the nuts is wrong, too, but I can totally see why he did.
You can rationalize intentionally shooting a person in an area that causes intentional injury…and you call me a Fascist! That’s truly rich.

Tyger
Field Fines would justify the act to those willing to pay the price to act like a “Gangsta” saying that you can do what you want so long as you have the cash to cover it. They have to be bounced from the field and made to understand that the matter may lead to further civil actions separate and independent of the field. I assure you that if that kid suffered a real injury, the parents would not let the field off the hook in any actions they would take. In fact they may try and sue the field first and the player as an after thought.

Look, it is simple, there is NO justification for what was shown in that video, none.
Death is just a passage...so bring more paint!!!
0

#48 User is offline   hannibal 

  • Forum Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 14-May 07
  • Brigade Name:HANNIBAL 90

Posted 14 May 2007 - 03:27 PM

I'd rather Barrel tag some one. And watch them jump.
0

#49 User is offline   Marauder_Pilot 

  • Thrilling Heroics
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,237
  • Joined: 10-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whitehorse, Yukon
  • Brigade Name:Marauder_Pilot

Posted 14 May 2007 - 04:03 PM

View PostTraakon, on May 14 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

I an involving my nephew more and more in paintball and should some fool pull that act on him, he better be able to run faster than myself and the guys in blue who will be coming to pick him up.


Quote

Quote

So, you advocate your nephew shooting someone 3 times at point-blank when he's getting surrendered, but if someone shoots back, the guy shooting back is suddenly the bad guy?
EDIT: AND HOW THE HELL IS YOU BEATING THE PERSON ANY BETTER THEN WHAT HE DID? HELL, IT'S CONSIDERABLY WORSE! You call other players violent and draconian in the same post that you say you'd gladly harm them! What the hell kind of rationalization and good example for your nephew is that?


Where in the heck did you get that I was going to “beat this kid up”? That may be how you think, but it is not how I think and it damn sure is not how I handle situations. You superimposed your own vision of retaliation on my post which specifically mentioned involving the proper authorities i.e “Guys in Blue.”

What I get from this is that you'd go after the kid. I've never seen something like that used in a context other then at least restraining someone. What I get is that you'd be just a vengeful as the person shooting your nephew. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm going off what I read.

View PostTraakon, on May 14 2007, 03:24 PM, said:

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 02:25 PM, said:

Let's assume that the surrender rule is in effect at that field. Not an unreasonable assumption for an indoor field with renters playing. If we're going under the assumption that shooting someone with a paintball is assault outside of the game, and someone is outside the game when they break the rules, then the kid shooting the surrenderer would have broken the rules and, therefore, been outside the game. So, the surrenderer is actually acting in self defense.
Now, I know that's a ridiculous point to make. But my point is that calling this 'assault' is bull.


OK, I’m going to go slow because I know how what people read translates differently when it reaches their brain. From the video we saw, the older kid was not defending himself and not in any personal danger. He took a deliberate shot at close range with intent to injure…That’s assault. We can only go by what was seen in the video and that’s what it showed.


Quote

3 deliberate, slow shots is just as cruel as the other guy shooting the kid in the nuts. Shooting the kid in the nuts is wrong, too, but I can totally see why he did.
You can rationalize intentionally shooting a person in an area that causes intentional injury…and you call me a Fascist! That’s truly rich.

They BOTH made deliberate shots to injure. Watch as the kid shoots the pumper 3 times in the stomach. That sounds like a pretty soft, sensitive spot, too. He didn't need to shoot 3 times. I could call anything past 1 assault. I wouldn't, but I could.
And I never said I could rationalize it. I could see why he did it, yes, but I never called it right. And I never called you a fascist, I was commenting on what I read as your suggestion to remove thuggery with thuggery.
0

#50 User is offline   EpShot 

  • Sophomore Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 575
  • Joined: 10-August 06

Posted 14 May 2007 - 04:33 PM

ok.. how do people end up getting shots when they surrender someone. Are you guys coming in to the side of them? completely behind them.
I've surrendered a few people, but only when tehy were the last ones, and i would come up behind them and scream at them, if they did have the presence of mind to turn and shoot, they would have to do at least 145degrees. I'm already aiming at them.

i think people are getting shot because the other person does not feel compromised, and in fact they probably weren't as compromised as you think, since they were able to not only get a shot off, but one in your direction.

If you can't get into a position to take them uncompromisingly, then just bunker them.

as far as video, if i saw a guy do that, i would light up his nuts as he tried to walk off the field(he's older so might take a few more) I would just be "teaching him a lesson about sportmanship" and besides, he fired after he was out, so i don't see a problem firing on him even if i was out. If that was my lil brother.. the cops could pull be off him.

This post has been edited by EpShot: 14 May 2007 - 04:34 PM

0

#51 User is offline   Traakon 

  • I came I saw, I ...wait...what was the question?
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chandler, Az
  • Brigade Name:Traakon

Posted 14 May 2007 - 05:08 PM

Quote

What I get from this is that you'd go after the kid. I've never seen something like that used in a context other then at least restraining someone. What I get is that you'd be just a vengeful as the person shooting your nephew. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm going off what I read.


Your right, my point exactly was that I would restrain him until he could be dealt with by the authorities. If you call that vengance, we really need to work on vocabulary so we are both on the same page.

I have watched the video a few more times just to be sure that I was not missing something, that I was not elevating the older kids act unjustly. The younger kid appears to be scared and totally unaware of whats going on. The older kid also clearly intends to hurt him. The end result is that the younger kid will likely never play again and the older kid has a group that think he did the right thing "teaching the kid a lesson". If you support that train of thought, then take your "THUG" tags and wear them proudly.

It appears on this issue we live in two different worlds; not the first time this has become an issue in these forums.

I will never be convinced that intentionally causeing an injury or taking a deliberate shot that I knew could cause injury can be justified. If you have to bring "self defense' into paintball to justify hurting another player then the game is lost.
Death is just a passage...so bring more paint!!!
0

#52 User is offline   Marauder_Pilot 

  • Thrilling Heroics
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,237
  • Joined: 10-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whitehorse, Yukon
  • Brigade Name:Marauder_Pilot

Posted 14 May 2007 - 05:19 PM

We can't see the younger kid's face at all, so neither of us can evaluate if he was surprised or scared or not. However, he's didn't jump or duck or anything-I saw the little kid turning around slowly and then shooting the older guy 3 times. I see the older guy pointing at him until he shoots, which was well after all 3 shots were fired. He wasn't gesturing or anything, he was just sort of standing there. The way he was standing, he could have easily been standing around on the field waiting for a game, instead of trying to surrender someone. Not intimidating at all.

However, I'm sorry about misinterpreting you going after the guy as something other then keeping him around until the police got there. That I can agree with, although I'd have personally enlisted the staff to help preventing him from leaving. Either way, same intention.
0

#53 User is offline   Traakon 

  • I came I saw, I ...wait...what was the question?
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chandler, Az
  • Brigade Name:Traakon

Posted 14 May 2007 - 05:27 PM

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 05:19 PM, said:

We can't see the younger kid's face at all, so neither of us can evaluate if he was surprised or scared or not. However, he's didn't jump or duck or anything-I saw the little kid turning around slowly and then shooting the older guy 3 times. I see the older guy pointing at him until he shoots, which was well after all 3 shots were fired. He wasn't gesturing or anything, he was just sort of standing there. The way he was standing, he could have easily been standing around on the field waiting for a game, instead of trying to surrender someone. Not intimidating at all.


We see things differently. I see a "little kid" with his shoulders hunched up and in a defensive posture. When your a little kid, all the other guy has to be is "BIG" to be intimidating. Its one of those dynamics you have to take into consideration when such divergent age groups interact.


Quote

However, I'm sorry about misinterpreting you going after the guy as something other then keeping him around until the police got there. That I can agree with, although I'd have personally enlisted the staff to help preventing him from leaving. Either way, same intention.


Then we find common ground and I appreciate your comment. Thank you. As for enlisting "staff". based on the local fields, I doubt the 13-15 year olds that constitute "staff" at most of the local fields would have been much more help than the kid on the ground in pain. My comments were based on my direct placement of the situation onto fields I am accustomed to as a point of reference and I am sure other fields might offer a better "staff' option.
Death is just a passage...so bring more paint!!!
0

#54 User is offline   Marauder_Pilot 

  • Thrilling Heroics
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,237
  • Joined: 10-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whitehorse, Yukon
  • Brigade Name:Marauder_Pilot

Posted 14 May 2007 - 05:33 PM

View PostTraakon, on May 14 2007, 05:27 PM, said:

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 05:19 PM, said:

We can't see the younger kid's face at all, so neither of us can evaluate if he was surprised or scared or not. However, he's didn't jump or duck or anything-I saw the little kid turning around slowly and then shooting the older guy 3 times. I see the older guy pointing at him until he shoots, which was well after all 3 shots were fired. He wasn't gesturing or anything, he was just sort of standing there. The way he was standing, he could have easily been standing around on the field waiting for a game, instead of trying to surrender someone. Not intimidating at all.


We see things differently. I see a "little kid" with his shoulders hunched up and in a defensive posture. When your a little kid, all the other guy has to be is "BIG" to be intimidating. Its one of those dynamics you have to take into consideration when such divergent age groups interact.

Fair enough. Since all we know is 9 seconds of this, it's all interpretation. All we know is that both of them were acting irresponsible and dangerously, and both were in the wrong, and I think we can all agree on that.

Quote

Quote

However, I'm sorry about misinterpreting you going after the guy as something other then keeping him around until the police got there. That I can agree with, although I'd have personally enlisted the staff to help preventing him from leaving. Either way, same intention.


Then we find common ground and I appreciate your comment. Thank you. As for enlisting "staff". based on the local fields, I doubt the 13-15 year olds that constitute "staff" at most of the local fields would have been much more help than the kid on the ground in pain. My comments were based on my direct placement of the situation onto fields I am accustomed to as a point of reference and I am sure other fields might offer a better "staff' option.

Well, were my local field staff of that age as well, then, yeah, I'd be doing most of the work myself. However, my local field it located behind the owner's house, and the owner and staff are mostly some large, reasonably intimidating people. Either way, it's the police's and not our place to figure out if it's assault.
0

#55 User is offline   StLucifer 

  • Forum Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 01-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Brigade Name:STLUCIFER

Posted 14 May 2007 - 05:57 PM

I say bunker, I only ask young kids to surrender but even then I only take my marker off them once they say that they did, I learned not to trust the little punks the hard way.
0

#56 User is offline   mechredd 

  • Chupathingy!?
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 319
  • Joined: 14-May 05
  • Location:Michigan
  • Brigade Name:mechredd

Posted 14 May 2007 - 06:40 PM

I don't trust anyone to surrender, and I would rather be bunkered myself because I'll have atleast a slim chance of escape.
"Accuracy by volume has been, and will remain, the best way to score eliminations." - Tom Kaye
0

#57 User is offline   Tyger 

  • Have tail, will travel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,819
  • Joined: 22-September 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North America / Great Lakes area
  • Brigade Name:Tyger

Posted 14 May 2007 - 07:14 PM

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 05:04 PM, said:

View PostTyger, on May 14 2007, 02:46 PM, said:

Would you be as eager to defend the older player if he punched the kid in the head? Same words, same circumstance, but instead of shooting the kid he makes a fist and punches the kid full force in the head and knocks him out. Would the kid been asking for it then?
There's a difference in damage and ability, between getting shot in a soft spot with a paintball at close range and a punch in the head. Yeah, getting shot in the stomach at point blank is going to hurt like hell. Kid probably had a nasty welt and such for a week.
Punch in the head? That's got all sort of potential for serious, long-term, lasting damage, for one. Not that a paintball doesn't, but not near as much.

The end result was the same as if the aggressor punched the kid in the head. The aggressor was mad, and he took out his frustrations using an implement in a manner that it was not meant to be used in and INJURED A MINOR. Shall we start with child services, or just call the cops and let them figure it out? The "difference" is that we think that players think it's ok because he used a paintgun and not his fist.

Let's go over a fact. The kid was ON THE GROUND CRYING. Put your machismo away and let's look at this from outside of paintball. If an adult hard-checked a minor on a hockey rink, you think that'd fly? In your world it might, but in the real world people would be appalled at it. How about an adult giving a full-force tackle to a kid playing pop-warner? Or how about an adult football player only kind-of driving a kid into the ground. It's less damage, but the result is the same. Kid's on the ground, crying and in pain, and the adult walks away having the revenge he wanted.

And somehow, this is ok because the adult didn't actually strike the child? Sorry, still does not fly with me. The fact remains that the kid was hurt because of someone else's actions. In the eyes of the law, it wouldn't matter if the guy used his fist or a club or a paintgun, he made a DECISION in the moment and CHOSE to injure a minor. And you're still defending him saying that it "wasn't that bad".

The adult acted in rage and ultimately acted out and injured a child. Long term injury, short term pain, doesn't matter. The adult lashed out and CHOSE to hurt a child. Even if it was an accidental pull of the trigger, his action to walk away and be indignant to the child's pain is enough to show a court of law his intent. And the saddest part is that the players, the people who should be the most aware of how we're perceived, support the adult's actions and think the kid deserved to be injured.

I see things like this and then wonder how it is that paintball players are shocked that paintball still has a bad reputation.

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 05:04 PM, said:

I never said that it's a good idea.

Orly?

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 13 2007, 02:33 PM, said:

If the noob shoots back, I just follow this example.
I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret you saying you would follow the example in the video to mean "I would never ever do this because it's not a good idea?"

You said you'd DO EXACTLY WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS! I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret 10 words and one link wrong somehow? I'm not all that bright sometimes and I may have somehow missed all those years of "English" somehow?

I saw this video in the morning, and I'm still disgusted.

-Tyger
<div align="center"><b>Classic Web Dog Radio hosted by <a href="http://webdog.specialopspaintball.com" target="_blank">Special Ops!</a> / <!--coloro:#0000FF--><span style="color:#0000FF"><!--/coloro-->Webdog Radio. Old Dog, New Tricks<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/WebDogPaintball" target="_blank">Now on Youtube!</a></b>
<img src="http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc152/Tyger_wdr/Forum%20Images/TechPBSigImage.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
<b><!--coloro:#000080--><span style="color:#000080"><!--/coloro-->0096 2251 2110 8105<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></b></div>
0

#58 User is offline   llama_rider 

  • all aboard the short bus!
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,068
  • Joined: 25-July 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the back of the bus

Posted 14 May 2007 - 07:16 PM

I will bunker friends and more experienced players but tend to surrender new comers and little kids so as not to scare them off or hurt them.
"Let your plans be dark and as impenetratable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt."-Sun Tzu

Vanilla Coke is back from the DEAD!!!!!!!! ♥

Stay Updated on Jim(from APE)'s Cancer
0

#59 User is offline   mechredd 

  • Chupathingy!?
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 319
  • Joined: 14-May 05
  • Location:Michigan
  • Brigade Name:mechredd

Posted 14 May 2007 - 07:30 PM

View PostTyger, on May 14 2007, 10:14 PM, said:

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 13 2007, 02:33 PM, said:

If the noob shoots back, I just follow this example.
I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret you saying you would follow the example in the video to mean "I would never ever do this because it's not a good idea?"

You said you'd DO EXACTLY WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS! I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret 10 words and one link wrong somehow? I'm not all that bright sometimes and I may have somehow missed all those years of "English" somehow?

I saw this video in the morning, and I'm still disgusted.

-Tyger

As good as it would make me feel to shoot that kid like that, I still think that it is wrong and wouldn't do it.

At last years TWC I was hit and on my way to the dead zone, my barrel sleave was on and my marker was in the air. A noob on his sleeveway in sent a stream into my chest me from less that 10' feet away. I yelled at him " I'm out you stupid noob!", and then after I start to walk away he puts is marker to my left hand and opens up on my fingers from literally less than an inch away. Any closer and his barrel would have been touching me. It tore open my hand which had to be patched up my the field medic, and all it got him was an ejection from the 2 day event before the first intermission. He just so happened to be dumb enough to do this in front of a ref that was looking strait at us.

This post has been edited by mechredd: 14 May 2007 - 07:32 PM

"Accuracy by volume has been, and will remain, the best way to score eliminations." - Tom Kaye
0

#60 User is offline   Marauder_Pilot 

  • Thrilling Heroics
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,237
  • Joined: 10-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whitehorse, Yukon
  • Brigade Name:Marauder_Pilot

Posted 14 May 2007 - 07:37 PM

This isn't quite the same scenario as it would be in a full-contact sport. In those sports, it wouldn't fly because the kid is basically defenseless. In paintball, everybody has the exact same capability to injure because we're all using the same tool. How do we know that the kid hasn't caused even more injury, but the older guy has enough tolerance for pain to walk out of frame before having to sit down or whatever because he now has 3 massive welts on his stomach?
We can't look at this outside of paintball because this is paintball and a wholly different scenario. This isn't somebody hitting a defenseless kid. This is somebody who was arguably defenseless getting attacked and reacting.

Ok, you want to look at this outside of paintball? Alright, let's say some kid comes up and punches me several times in the back of the head or something as I'm minding my own business. Somewhere that hurts. I'm not going to sit down and say 'no, little Johnny, don't do that.' I'm going to grab the little bugger and restrain him! Turn him over to his parents or the police or whatever. And do you really think taking some little kid outside of the game is going to do anything? Hell, he's not even going to give you 5 seconds, and that's assuming his parent's don't get all over you for harassment.

Quote

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 14 2007, 05:04 PM, said:

I never said that it's a good idea.

Orly?

View PostMarauder_Pilot, on May 13 2007, 02:33 PM, said:

If the noob shoots back, I just follow this example.
I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret you saying you would follow the example in the video to mean "I would never ever do this because it's not a good idea?"

You said you'd DO EXACTLY WHAT THE VIDEO SHOWS! I'm sorry, did I somehow misinterpret 10 words and one link wrong somehow? I'm not all that bright sometimes and I may have somehow missed all those years of "English" somehow?


Point out where I said everything I suggest is a good idea? I know it's not a good idea. When it came down to the scenario, I don't know if I would shoot the kid. Maybe I would, maybe not. I'd probably get really PERTURBED. You would too if your payment for a favour was 3 point-blank shots to the chest. I'd have to restrain myself, for sure. Like I said, I don't consider myself a violent or angry person, but it burns the hell out of me when I try and help someone and get screwed for it.
0

Share this topic:


  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users