A Democratic congressional candidate in Colorado released a campaign ad featuring himself being pepper sprayed in the eyes in a bid to encourage non-lethal self-defense tools in schools to deter gun violence.


Levi Tillemann, who’s trying to woo the voters in the upcoming party’s primary in less than two weeks, criticized President Trump’s suggestion to arm school officials and teachers with guns, claiming pepper spray is a better alternative to stop potential school shooters.

“I’m calling on Congress to stop talking past each other and try something new,” Tilleman says in the video. “Empower schools and teachers with non-lethal self-defense tools, like this can of pepper spray.”


“Empower schools and teachers with non-lethal self-defense tools, like this can of pepper spray.”

- Levi Tillemann
“Pepper spray doesn’t cost much and it can be safely stored in a break glass in case of emergency cabinet. But it’s powerful and won’t accidentally kill a kid,” he continued. “Trust me, this will stop anybody in their tracks.”

The Democrat then proceeded to close his eyes and began spraying the pepper spray in his face. He’s later seen trying to wash off his face by dunking his head into water and spraying himself with a hose. “It’s incredibly painful, now I can’t see anything,” he said. “Wow, that’s intense.”

Film at 11... 😟

I wonder what other electoral stunts he is willing to perform?

I watched that on YouTube...

Kind of intense...

He dipped his pepper SPRAY Laced face into a clear plastic tub filled with blue liquid ( color of windshield fluid or Windex)...
Why? I don't know...perhaps his dad was GREEK AND USED WINDEX FOR EVERYTHING IMAGINABLE.

When confronting an armed murderer intent on killing everyone in sight, would you like to have;
a) your own gun that you have trained with
b) pepper spray
c) a bucket of rocks
d) none of the above, as I don't believe the answer to violance is more violance. It is more moral to allow the murderer to kill me.

Since I would like to try and live through the situation, I'll pick "a", though I really do know some folk who would pick "d".

David (dpnewell)

"a" absolutely.

---

I'd like to hear more about the rocks... are they valuable rocks? laden with precious stones perhaps?

I mean, if the guy is intent on killing "everyone in sight" what are the odds he'd actually get to me before I could high tail it out of there, bucket of diamond encrusted rocks in hand...

I'm gonna pick c, the bucket of precious stones... I'm gonna heave the lightest one at the guys head and then run like a cracked-out kenyan to the nearest airport, get to jamaica, cash in the stones, live like a king...

Your question fails to take into account the rest of the time.

What do you think the odds are that you are ever going to need to confront a "violent murderer intent on killing everyone in sight"? I'm not sure what they actually are, as the likelihood would depend on where you live/work etc. But given you're in the burbs (or rural) it's likely pretty low.

Then you have to consider time... Even if you need to confront said violent murderer, you're only doing so for a minute or two of your life. Let's say 5 min. To make sure you have your gun on you for that 5 min you need to ensure you have it on you for the other 26,280,000 minutes (assuming 50 years of gun ownership) as well.

That's 26million minutes where something could go wrong and you have a gun when you wish you didn't have a gun. Violent conflicts which should just result in a fist fight... Doing backflips to show off and accidentally shooting someone when your gun falls out of your pants... Drinking...

I personally would rather not have to carry a gun for 26 million minutes to make sure I have one for the 5 min it may be necessary... I'll just improvise, thank you very much... Or get shot... That's not that terrible an outcome either....

Al knows the Kung Fu.. 😟

Snatch the pebble from my hand little asshopper...8-[

Yeah, I only have car insurance when I'm in a wreck.

And it's my right to choose whether I want to deal with the cost/burden of it and whether it's worth the effort.

The question was what you would prefer. I gave my answer. I'm not telling other people what to do.

Carrying a gun is a risk. If you're carrying a gun and get into a fight with someone, there's a chance you can get shot by your own gun. Or that you could shoot someone who you only intended to beat a little bit. You have to be constantly responsible for your weapon if you carry one. I don't find that worth the small risk I would need one.

Your mileage may vary. I've made it 43 years without needing one, and been in plenty of situations where if I had one it would have been much worse. For me I've made the right decision.

You woulda popped a cap in some ass..?? 😕

Who knows. I certainly would not have been able to do some of the things I've done if I had been armed.

Hell... I've chased cars down the street with no plan of what I was going to do if I caught them other than smash any part of the car I could reach.... The irony is that by the time I almost caught up I had resigned myself to getting my azz beat by the 4 people inside... Only to have them panic and run a red light in front of a cop.

If I had a gun would I have been lazy and just popped a few shots off? I certainly couldn't plan of smashing parts of their car while armed, that becomes a much different crime.

You can't beat on homeless people while armed. That becomes a much different crime.

You can't interject yourself in bar fights your drunk friends are e getting into when you're armed.... What if one of the two grabs your gun while you're in the middle of the two?

This is all crap that's happened in the past 5 or 6 years...

So people who carry are caught up in dream scenarios, yet you're making arguments while not even understanding the whole point of CC....^^^

I've made it 42 years without shooting anyone.

I did brandish once to remove vermin from my mom's front yard once. They schit their pants when I came out with my scary machine gun and a shaved head in my undies.

Worked patrol in several school and community college districts, some in blighted urban areas, without carrying a gun...got involved in several physical arrests and broke up many fights...and afterwards realized a sidearm would have been a liability...deadly force was not necessary in any of those cases, but could have become a possibility had I been carrying and the suspect tried to get my weapon. Working on campus, you always have to think about the back-ground of a potential shooting...

Only a couple of times during my career did I feel that I needed a weapon. One was protecting a college campus in Long Beach during the Rodney King riots, as nearby businesses went up in flames and groups of thugs roamed the adjacent streets. The other time was working a college football game with two other officers. After the game, two rival gangs gathered outside the stadium...on one side the group included several members of our college's team. The three of us, armed only with batons and pepper spray, got between the two large groups of angry gang-bangers, prolly 75-100 guys in all......we were surrounded, and yelling at the top of our lungs telling them to disperse...after several tense minutes of stand-off we heard the "whoop whoop" of sirens and flashing blues and reds from two LASO patrol cars...man, were we relieved to see those guys...

Z... My scenarios are real. I am 100% certain that having a gun on me would have been a detriment in each of them.

What am I missing?

The funny thing is I'm not even trying to tell anyone whether they can carry or not. I am on record saying I think everyone should be allowed to have a nuke if they want it.

But here you are trying to tell me I should have been carrying a gun for my own safety all these years...

It's better than nothing

But the idea it "stops anyone in their tracks" is categorically false

Bro I'm all for you not carrying, you're comfortable with your level of prrotection.