Soldiers Beaten Outside Bar

[Polaris_Echoes]

Two soldiers, who just returned from duty in Iraq, were horribly beaten outside a bar in Seattle and someone with a video camera captured the entire incident.

Reportedly, the two men were with two women at a nightclub when the suspects in the pending case groped the two women. One of the women says she threw a hot dog at the suspects and walked away. The suspects allegedly ran after them and that's when the two soldiers got involved.

As seen in the video, the two soldiers ended up prostrate in the road, near on-coming traffic.

Police were able to get some pretty clear pictures of the suspects and are looking for anyone who knows the three wanted men to come forward with information.

There is no word on the condition of the soldiers.


Taken from: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/17/national/main563855.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStories



The video is pretty disgusting. The people who did this are worthless human beings in my opinion.

[Kak]

That really is terrible. I can't believe they did that right on that street with all those cars caught up in traffic.

[Psyche]

not to sound like a bitch or anything, I am sympathetic but a lot of people have gotten the crap beaten out of them in front of a bar, does their having been in Iraq give them some special right that everyone else doesn't have?

[Kak]

My reaction didn't even take into account the fact that they were soldiers. I saw this as two men defending women getting the shit beat out of them in front of probably over a hundred bystanders in a busy street.

Maybe the reason Polaris feels to strongly about this is because they were soldiers, but that doesn't matter one bit to me. It's not like this is some kind of anti-iraq war act, as the guys who did this didn't look like they were too into politics.

[Psyche]

My reaction didn't even take into account the fact that they were soldiers. I saw this as two men defending women getting the shit beat out of them in front of probably over a hundred bystanders in a busy street.

Maybe the reason Polaris feels to strongly about this is because they were soldiers, but that doesn't matter one bit to me. It's not like this is some kind of anti-iraq war act, as the guys who did this didn't look like they were too into politics.


yea, I mean it's a horrible thing to do to people, but why even mention that they're soldiers? At least I know chivalry isn't dead now. Just badly bruised

[Apoc]

No offense, but aren't they supposed to be in the military? Didn't the government spend millions of dollars training them how to fight and win such things?

[Grunt]

I don't think they trained them how to fight when they were drunk. Plus if they did fight, they could probally get sued because the people who attacked them could say that the soldiers were trained to fight, so should of used restraint.

[Milkman Dan]

yea, I mean it's a horrible thing to do to people, but why even mention that they're soldiers? At least I know chivalry isn't dead now. Just badly bruised
It makes for a more interesting story. People wouldn't read a story about two guys getting beat up in a bar, because that's a rather common occurance.

What makes it more interesting, is that these two soldiers were probably targeted by those guys. They have a video of them beating them up just so they can brag they beat up two American soldiers.

[Kak]

Maybe that's one of the reasons why they did it, but it couldn't have been the dominating one. The soldiers stepped in when the bad guys tried to grope the women, and pissed off some people with others that got their back, and got their asses kicked. Fights get taped all the time, and it doesn't even look like they taped the fight, it looks like a guy got his camera after the fighting was done and started filming. I don't think they were targetted for being soldiers, and this definately wasn't a politically motivated attack.

[GoatChomper]

I'm wondering what the heck this was doing in the Firebox.
No offense, but aren't they supposed to be in the military? Didn't the government spend millions of dollars training them how to fight and win such things?
Your poker face needs practice, but I'll play along anyway.....

Military training doesn't necessarily entail training to defeat a dozen or so people in hand-to-hand combat.

[Milkman Dan]

Maybe that's one of the reasons why they did it, but it couldn't have been the dominating one. The soldiers stepped in when the bad guys tried to grope the women, and pissed off some people with others that got their back, and got their asses kicked.

Er...
One of the women says she threw a hot dog at the suspects and walked away. The suspects allegedly ran after them and that's when the two soldiers got involved.

[SWATJester_os]

Mainly because defending the helpless is one of those morals that we're taught, as part of the army values. That's why it matters that they were soldiers. Who else was going to step in and defend the women?

Why are you bitching about "Oh it shouldn't matter who they were" and ignoring the fact that the fucking suspects were assaulting the women long before the soldiers got involved.

[Shadow]

Those dirty motherfuckers. Hmmm, retribution is sweet. I hope those bastards get raped by Bubba in the slammer.

[Delta]

Mainly because defending the helpless is one of those morals that we're taught, as part of the army values. That's why it matters that they were soldiers. Who else was going to step in and defend the women?

Why are you bitching about "Oh it shouldn't matter who they were" and ignoring the fact that the fucking suspects were assaulting the women long before the soldiers got involved.

It's really a shame there weren't 10 soldiers. Or even a few bigger, trained, upstanding guys.

But what goes around comes around.

[Wallrod]

Why are you bitching about "Oh it shouldn't matter who they were" and ignoring the fact that the fucking suspects were assaulting the women long before the soldiers got involved.
I don't think any of the above posts made statements particularly ignorant of that fact, and it's beyond me why those two factors or opinions are linked in any way.

I understand it's an emotive subject for you, but chill out, nobody's hating on soldiers or America or what have you. (edit: p_f, i'm referring to in this thread)

[Shadow]

I don't think any of the above posts made statements particularly ignorant of that fact, and it's beyond me why those two factors or opinions are linked in any way.

I understand it's an emotive subject for you, but chill out, nobody's hating on soldiers or America or what have you.

Mate, I've heard from friends in the US that public opinion for the war in Iraq is almost as bad as that of Vietnam. Maybe this fact makes those who serve/served in Iraq feel the way SWAT does? Maybe those two advertised that they were just back from Iraq, so the mob beat the fuck out of them? who knows...

[SWATJester_os]

I don't think any of the above posts made statements particularly ignorant of that fact, and it's beyond me why those two factors or opinions are linked in any way.

I understand it's an emotive subject for you, but chill out, nobody's hating on soldiers or America or what have you. (edit: p_f, i'm referring to in this thread)

My comment was directed at psyche.

[Kak]

Mate, I've heard from friends in the US that public opinion for the war in Iraq is almost as bad as that of Vietnam. Maybe this fact makes those who serve/served in Iraq feel the way SWAT does? Maybe those two advertised that they were just back from Iraq, so the mob beat the fuck out of them? who knows...
After watching the video, do you honestly think the guys you saw assaulting the two soldiers cared even a little about politics?

To me, this is a case of some punks touching two girls with two guys. The girls ran away, the punks followed them to harrass them some more, and the two guys (who happened to be soldiers) stepped in, then got their asses kicked by the punks and their friends.

[Shadow]

My reply was in the defense of SWAT's way of thinking, not the case. Keep your minds open to different possibilities - think outside the square. Nobody ever siad the world was supposed to make sense.

[Psyche]

My comment was directed at psyche.


uh If you kept reading I made a comment about chivalry not being dead. that said I've heard of similar situations they just weren't caught on tape. Next time I go to a club and see something similar I'll make sure to have a camera so everyone can comment on it.

[Milkman Dan]

uh If you kept reading I made a comment about chivalry not being dead. that said I've heard of similar situations they just weren't caught on tape. Next time I go to a club and see something similar I'll make sure to have a camera so everyone can comment on it.
Let's see...
...does their having been in Iraq give them some special right that everyone else doesn't have?
...but why even mention that they're soldiers?

Try not to go all Pat Robertson on us. Good job on replying with points he did not refer to, though.

[[Rapid-Fire]]

theres me thinking soldiers are trained to kill and should be able to look after themselfs in such 'situations'

:o

[Milkman Dan]

']theres me thinking soldiers are trained to kill and should be able to look after themselfs in such 'situations'

:o
That was already addressed with possible inebriation, restraint, and the fact that you're a soldier doesn't mean you're able to take on 50 ninjas at one time.

[Psyche]

Try not to go all Pat Robertson on us. Good job on replying with points he did not refer to, though.


uh, he said all i focused on was the fact that they were soldiers and i didn't even notice that they were helping a woman which to i corrected him. but good try. and you can't be a religious fanatic if you don't believe in religion but thanks for trying

[Milkman Dan]

uh, he said all i focused on was the fact that they were soldiers and i didn't even notice that they were helping a woman which to i corrected him. but good try. and you can't be a religious fanatic if you don't believe in religion but thanks for trying
*sigh* You took that the wrong way. I was referring to his comments about assassination of the Venezuelan president, and his actions/comments about said comments when confronted about it. That's what I get for being topical.

The main point of SWAT's post was replying to your questions of why does it matter if they're soldiers or does it mean they're special because of it. It did seem a little callous that you jumped to point that fact out the first chance you got.

[[Rapid-Fire]]

That was already addressed with possible inebriation, restraint, and the fact that you're a soldier doesn't mean you're able to take on 50 ninjas at one time.

i was soo thinking of the film Equilibrium then.

[Kak]

Yeah isn't there a scenario like that in Con Air, in the beginning, where Cage totally kills that guy in self defense then goes to prison cause he's a soldier?

[akodo]

i have a crappy slow connection hence the video did not play well for me. some comments, mainly based on the text descriptions

Yes, i think the title is somewhat misleading, to me it implies that the people were beaten because they were soldiers. Obviously this was not the case. The news may have included the blurb about them being recently returned soldiers to sensationalize, or to gain more empathy for them from the audience as decent standup people than just 2 random guys, in the same way when a kid catches a stray bullet in a driveby, and they happened to be an honor student or osmething, the news report will note "11 year old Honor Student Jill Franton gun downed in gang related incident"

Note the acticle says "the two men were with two women". Maybe these guys would have stood up and intervened if the assholes were harrasing and groping 2 random women. Maybe that owuld relate to them being soldiers and having a moral concept that is sadly lacking in today's world instilled in them in the military. Of course, i know a lot of guys who grew up on farms and ranches in rural areas who are the type to step in to defend an unknown woman if some guy at a bar was groping them.

HOWEVER, these weren't two unknown women. They were the guys 'dates' and be they romantic, or just going out as friends, your average male is going to invervene when another male is harrassing and groping your girlfriend/friend. That is the norm.

Milkman writes , is that these two soldiers were probably targeted by those guys. They have a video of them beating them up just so they can brag they beat up two American soldiers."

Question:Am i reading your comment right? do you believe the asshole assailants were the ones who were taping? as opposed to some random person who had a videocamera and then gave the tape to police?

I find it unlikely that these guys were targeted because they were soldiers. I could not tell from the video, but other than haircut, were they wearing obvious military clothing? Also, it seems unlikely to get a group of guys together, give one a video camera, then go to a bar hoping some soldiers show up, then grope their dates in hopes of provoking a fight with said soldiers just to have a 'brag video'. Why not just jump out of a car and start punching a soldier while a friend tapes?

This does not seem like a 'targeted' incident to me.
peregrine wrote Mate, I've heard from friends in the US that public opinion for the war in Iraq is almost as bad as that of Vietnam. Maybe this fact makes those who serve/served in Iraq feel the way SWAT does? Maybe those two advertised that they were just back from Iraq, so the mob beat the fuck out of them? who knows...

Yes public opinion of the war is growing to be like that of vietnam, However, there is ONE BIG DIFFERENCE. Every person who opposes this war is against the bush administration and possibly the higher levels of brass. They begin nearly every comment with 'while we totally support our wonderful troops on the ground, but....' This is not a war where the hate is being taken out on returning soldiers. (yet, i suppose). The possibility of beating up soldiers because they are 'combat trained' is a possibility, just like beating up a guy with a letter jacket denoting his wrestling prowess or someone with a blackbelt.

Relating to that, Apoc writes No offense, but aren't they supposed to be in the military? Didn't the government spend millions of dollars training them how to fight and win such things? to which goat responds Military training doesn't necessarily entail training to defeat a dozen or so people in hand-to-hand combat.

Again, slow connection, bad video (although the opening walmart commercial ran just fine...) There were a dozen people in the fight? The acticle states the police got a good look at the asshole assailants thanks to the video, and are looking for the THREE wanted men.

Now, even a super 9th degree 15 blackbelt etc etc fighter is going to have trouble with 1 vs 12.

however, as far as i can tell this was a 2 vs 3 fight. In such a case, yes, the fact that the US army was supposed to have trained these guys in some hand to hand combat is relevant. You would think that a person the military trained in hand to hand combat would be the more likely person to win a fight. 2 vs 3 odds aren't THAT unbalanced. In all likelyhood, the two soldiers gave up the tactical advantage of suprise (two guys explode on one, eliminating him and reducing it to a 2vs2 fight before the original 3 even know what his happening) because they were hoping for a nonviolent end to the issue. Plus, fights are always extremely chaotic, and randomness can often play just as big, if not a bigger part, than training. Still, Apoc makes a point. This is not great indicator of the military's ability to effectively train for hand to hand combat.

[StandingCow]

First off, it looks like they were outnumbed by a good amount. You cant fight 12 people at once, I dont care who you are.

Just because they were soldiers over in iraq doesnt mean they were even really trained, they could have been in the AirForce (little training) for all we know.

This also has nothing to do with them being soldiers, again, its that they were beaten up for defending some women from a bunch of assholes.

[GrosPoisson]

Keep in mind that even if they were Army or Marine Corps, there's the chance that they were support types. Most likely, it's only the combat types who even consider practicing their hand to hand combat after basic training anyways.

[Kak]

This also has nothing to do with them being soldiers, again, its that they were beaten up for defending some women from a bunch of assholes.
Exactly what I have been saying.

And akodo, you're right. In the video, the soldiers are wearing plain cloths. There were about 30 African American guys huddled around their unconcious bodies. The video seemed to have been taken by a bystander, as the only part on tape is after the guys got beaten up. The guys who beat them up were African-American "gangsta" looking guys, one seemed to have a FUBU shirt. I really doubt this was a politically motivated attack but rather a "beaten up for defending some women from a bunch of assholes" attack.

[GoatChomper]

Yes public opinion of the war is growing to be like that of vietnam, However, there is ONE BIG DIFFERENCE. Every person who opposes this war is against the bush administration and possibly the higher levels of brass.
No, that's vastly overstating it.
however, as far as i can tell this was a 2 vs 3 fight. In such a case, yes, the fact that the US army was supposed to have trained these guys in some hand to hand combat is relevant. You would think that a person the military trained in hand to hand combat would be the more likely person to win a fight. 2 vs 3 odds aren't THAT unbalanced.
That training for anybody not slated for a specwar slot is rudimentary at best and consists of merely a few hours in which the emphasis is on using rifles and bayonets.....it does not emphasize fists and feet, and for anybody not in an infantry or specwar MOS it's nearly non-existant once they complete AIT.

Heck, in the mid-Eighties we ROTC candidates got exactly zero such scheduled training, not even bayonet training. My battery managed to borrow a few instructors and a bayonet course one afternoon at Ft. Knox during some otherwise downtime, and that was the sole extent of mine for the three years I was in uniform. I had far, far more hand-to-hand training from the LEO-related college courses I paid for and attended in later years.

[Kak]

And where did you get the information about it being a 2 v 3 fight? They singled out three suspects in the video yes, but those were the only ones stomping on the unconcious bodies of the guys. I'm sure more people were involved. And if not, there are quite a few "gangsta thugz" out there that can fight. I'm sure whoever was the toughest soldier had to fight two guys, while the other soldier fought one, if it really was 2 v 3, but I don't think that was the case.

[Milkman Dan]

Question:Am i reading your comment right? do you believe the asshole assailants were the ones who were taping? as opposed to some random person who had a videocamera and then gave the tape to police?It made it on the news, didn't it? I'm sure they're bonified gangstas with mad street cred for that.

I find it unlikely that these guys were targeted because they were soldiers. I could not tell from the video, but other than haircut, were they wearing obvious military clothing? Also, it seems unlikely to get a group of guys together, give one a video camera, then go to a bar hoping some soldiers show up, then grope their dates in hopes of provoking a fight with said soldiers just to have a 'brag video'. Why not just jump out of a car and start punching a soldier while a friend tapes?

This does not seem like a 'targeted' incident to me.
The soldiers stepped in and probably said something about them being in the Army. Now, I can tell you from this stuff from experience. I went to a school where we had a fight everyday. I'm not being racist, but black kids who think they're a "gangsta" tend to loooooove jumping their enemies. I've seen it happen a lot. They also seem to have an issue with feeling like they have to prove themselves to everyone. Hence the amount of fights at my school. Something little would turn these two kids against eachother at a drop of a hat. So, the guys hearing this probably went off on some sort of dominance rampage. "So, you think you a soldier, huh?" Something along the lines of that. Got a couple of his friends, and jumped the two soldiers. It's not that far-fetched of an idea.

[Kak]

But all the article says is the soldiers stepped in when the "gangstas" chased the girls they were trying to sexually assault. The "gangstas" got mad that they were challenged, so they called over some "homies" and attacked the guys, who happened to be soldiers. That's all the article says, and that sounds like the type of thing that would start a fight like this. Two guys stopped some "thugz" from sexually assaulting the women they were with, and the "thugz" felt challenged and a fight broke out. That's really all the motive in the world both parties would need to fight. The "gangstas" didn't need any more reason in there eyes to attack the guys.

The soldiers stepped in to protect the women and the "gangstas" didn't want to be "messed" with. I don't even think the soldiers talked to the "thugz" before the incident occured, so even if the soldiers did mention that they were soldiers, the fight would have been already sparked before the talked to the guys.

This is going from everything we can gather from the article and video though, there is probably much more to it.

All I'm saying is that them being soldiers might have been some extra incentive for the "gangstas" to fight, but that was probably just a bonus for them, nothing would have played out differently. Or they might have not even known the guys were soldiers, which is probably the situation, and would make this a case of "two good guys try to stop bad guys from doing bad things, so bad guys gang up and beat up the good guys". That's how I see it.

[akodo]

And where did you get the information about it being a 2 v 3 fight?

the information came from the police having 3 wanted suspects. Where does the number 12 come from? as stated, the video for me is quite jerky. Any links where i can download it rather than watch it streaming? Are there 12 people seen beating them on the tape? Yes, i know the tape shows many individuals standing around either doing nothing or cheering the assailants on, i can see that much. However, in most fights there ends up being a crowd, just because there is a crowd is not grounds to assume there were 12 fighters.


I'm sure whoever was the toughest soldier had to fight two guys, while the other soldier fought one, if it really was 2 v 3, but I don't think that was the case.

Probably wouldn't be time to discuss who was the tougher of the two, and if they were thinking tactical, isn't the solution to a 2-3 to have 2 guys working as a team to overwhelm the closest one, and then engage the other two as 2 on 1 as much as possible? Defeat in Detail or somesuch.

However, the point that such large segment of our military are NOT forward combat troops, and as such receive little or no hand to hand combat once outside of basic, and may get an extremely glossed over version of basic is a very valid point that has been brought up by others just recently

[akodo]

It made it on the news, didn't it? I'm sure they're bonified gangstas with mad street cred for that.


The rodney king beating made the news. Just because something made the news doesn't mean the filmer was involved. As another stated, the video is incomplete showing the ending of the incident. This also indicates the video was shot by someone who was NOT part of the confrontation.


The soldiers stepped in and probably said something about them being in the Army.

that is rampant speculation.


Now I can tell you from this stuff from experience. I went to a school where we had a fight everyday. I'm not being racist, but black kids who think they're a "gangsta" tend to loooooove jumping their enemies. I've seen it happen a lot. They also seem to have an issue with feeling like they have to prove themselves to everyone. Hence the amount of fights at my school. Something little would turn these two kids against eachother at a drop of a hat. So, the guys hearing this probably went off on some sort of dominance rampage. "So, you think you a soldier, huh?" Something along the lines of that. Got a couple of his friends, and jumped the two soldiers. It's not that far-fetched of an idea.
what you say here i can agree with except for the final conclusion. Using your own experiences, wasn't the fact that a pair of guys had the balls to stand up to them enough of a 'diss' that the 'gangstas' would retalliate?

also, on a side note, it used to be that if you had to get a bunch of buddies together to fight a single guy you were considered a wuss for not fighting him 'man on man'. When and why did/does 'street cred' now take the view of it being good to jump a guy with overwhelming odds on your side. Hell my gramma can beat some ass if she is allowed to recruit 10-15 young men to assist in the beating.

I guess my gramma gotz massive 'street cred' potential.

[Milkman Dan]

that is rampant speculation.
Is it really rampant speculation? It's used as a pick-up line. I don't see how it's so hard to imagine them saying this to try and ward off a possible fight. Especially if they were drunk. They probably just told them to leave the girls alone, and the suspects probably said something along the likes of "What're you going to do about it," and that's when they most likely indicated they were in the Army.


what you say here i can agree with except for the final conclusion. Using your own experiences, wasn't the fact that a pair of guys had the balls to stand up to them enough of a 'diss' that the 'gangstas' would retalliate?Wasn't it enough of a "diss" that the "gangstas" had no respect for the women and groped them, which is considered assault? If you noticed the video, those guys aren't exactly gentlemen. They're wearing FUBU, golden chains, and they even tried to steal his shoes when the guy was out. That's your stereotypical gangsta right there.

also, on a side note, it used to be that if you had to get a bunch of buddies together to fight a single guy you were considered a wuss for not fighting him 'man on man'. When and why did/does 'street cred' now take the view of it being good to jump a guy with overwhelming odds on your side. Hell my gramma can beat some ass if she is allowed to recruit 10-15 young men to assist in the beating.Sadly, there's no shame in jumping someone in their eyes. There was two guys, and you say there were three. That's still not even, nor fair, even if you consider their "hand-to-hand" training. I'm pretty sure they probably had more than three people fight them. It's all gang mentality.

[GoatChomper]

I should paraphrase what my old police instructor told us.....you can do everything right, and still lose. That's life.

[akodo]

Is it really rampant speculation? It's used as a pick-up line. I don't see how it's so hard to imagine them saying this to try and ward off a possible fight. Especially if they were drunk. They probably just told them to leave the girls alone, and the suspects probably said something along the likes of "What're you going to do about it," and that's when they most likely indicated they were in the Army.



Yes it really is rampant speculation.

remember, rampant speculation doesn't mean impossible or anything, it just means it is based on zero evidence.

[Milkman Dan]

Yes it really is rampant speculation.

remember, rampant speculation doesn't mean impossible or anything, it just means it is based on zero evidence.
So, you use it in a demeaning way on me even though, according to your definition, we're all doing "rampant speculation".

Well, guess this entire discussion is invalid.

[Shadow]

So, you use it in a demeaning way on me even though, according to your definition, we're all doing "rampant speculation".

Well, guess this entire discussion is invalid.

Agreed - Even Police officers use speculation in cases to create a basis to begin collecting evidence. You just stuck your foot in a big cow pie there, Akodo...

[akodo]

if you read my original post, all my conclusions were drawn directly from the article itself, such as the soldiers not defending some unknown women, but defending people they were out with. The cases when this wasn't so i stated 'i think, it seems to me, i believe, etc.'

no police do not use speculation. "to take to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence" So if police are speculating that is bad.

Now, of course, seeing a set of facts and drawing a reasonable conclusion, that is different. In interpreting facts, one must always draw from experience and personal observation of human behavior, but of course, these conclusions themselves are only theories, not facts.

example from this article. I theorize that these guys were probably out on a "date" with these women.

facts to build this conclusion on.
-The newspaper reports the guys were WITH the women.
-Equal ratio of males to females,
-Destination being a dance club.

The last two are good examples of interpreting the implication of a fact based on life experience. Akin to seeing a man holding a smoking gun standing over a bleeding man. Speculation would be to see a man with a gun and assume he was going to or had murdered someone.


Although if you look I note the possiblilty that these people were simply out as 'friends'

I stand by my assertation that stating 'these guys revealed themselves as soldiers because they were including this info in pickup lines'

you are basing this on no data other than these humans are soldiers.

here's an example of speculation. I bet those two guys had condoms in their wallets. Of course i have no factual basis on which to build that assertation, however, if we had a way to check, i'd be willing to put $20 on it.

[meifunk]

Let me step in here and say something, being from/stationed in Seattle I know the area well.

That bar is in a particularly 'seedy' part of the Seattle nightscene. I avoid that area like the plague for a couple reasons. One, my haircut makes me stand out from your average Seattleite. I'm not sure how many of you are familiar with Seattle, but it can be a pretty liberal city. I get plenty of colorful language, threats, and gestures in my direction any time I'm out in town in uniform. Most people stationed in this area are warned about making it known that you're in the military.

Secondly, as far as the S-Word being dropped in the title... I know at least for the Seattle area it's a big deal. We have SEVERAL military bases in this area. Western Washington is home to many, many servicemen/women of all branches. The story was probably picked up from one of our local channels here and syndicated with the same title. I can also say that it matters to me, because I don't like to see stuff like this happen to my brothers-in-arms.

Third, I've heard some people talking about it at work, there is quite the crowd of people looking for this group of stupids every night that they're out. Things like this don't settle well with any of us here, and although I think it's a dumb idea to go looking for a fight, people will inevitably do dumb things.

I may be in the Coast Guard, and we may be small, but I hold all servicemen/women in very high regard. If it had been me, I'd have done the same thing. Then again, when I go out, it's with several people. I have a feeling these guys may not have been too familiar with Seattle...

Oh yeah, those kids aren't Seattle gangsters, either. They're some punk kids that had some false confidence because they outnumbered their opponents.

[SWATJester_os]

here here.