The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: puff357 on August 24, 2012, 10:10:15 AM
-
It occurred to me that having more people carrying concealed could pose a problem. Say your walking down the street and you here two shots near by. You turn and see and see a man shoot twice and there are three people laying on the ground.
What do you do?
-
Shoot twice into the air or the ground?
I try hard not to make assumptions.
"... You know how Fair Witnesses behave."
"Well ... no, I don't. I've never had any dealings with Fair Witnesses."
"So? Perhaps you weren't aware of it. Anne!"
Anne was seated on the springboard; she turned her head. Jubal called out, "That new house on the far hilltop - can you see what color they've painted it?"
Anne looked in the direction in which Jubal was pointing, and answered, "It's white on this side."
- Stranger in a Strange Land, pp 130
The last time we had a similar discussion, I decided the best course is to yell POLICE and observe how the armed actors react.
-
Are you in threat of death or serious bodily harm?
Regardless, take cover!
If you are threatened - Take appropriate action, and that action can only be defined at the time of the situation from you view point;
If you are not threatened - Do not insert yourself into the situation;
Did you witness the beginning of the situation - Act only on facts and do not assume.
-
If the shooter is not turning his attention at you, I would flee and take cover. Then I'd call 911 once I'm out of harm's way. I would never involve myself in a situation like this.
-
The last time we had a similar discussion, I decided the best course is to yell POLICE and observe how the armed actors react.
As m58 stated, why risk drawing attention to yourself and inserting yourself into a deadly situation? Is it worth it?
-
I agree with BBJohnnyT and M58.
A CCW lets you carry to protect yourself, it doesn't make you a cop, and it doesn't give you psychic powers.
-
Quote from: Solus on Today at 10:16:33 am
The last time we had a similar discussion, I decided the best course is to yell POLICE and observe how the armed actors react.
BBJohnnyT pulled this one out that I had missed: Unless you are an officer of the law NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER do this! You are not an officer, it sends the wrong message to everyone around you - good and bad, and it is illegal! It is hard to defend our purpose for carry as an ordinary citizen when the anti's can pull facts like this our to fuel their rants that we are all Dirty Harry wanna be's.
-
Quote from: Solus on Today at 10:16:33 am
The last time we had a similar discussion, I decided the best course is to yell POLICE and observe how the armed actors react.
BBJohnnyT pulled this one out that I had missed: Unless you are an officer of the law NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER do this! You are not an officer, it sends the wrong message to everyone around you - good and bad, and it is illegal! It is hard to defend our purpose for carry as an ordinary citizen when the anti's can pull facts like this our to fuel their rants that we are all Dirty Harry wanna be's.
Perhaps it would be better to yell "the police are on they" or "they have been called" that would probably bypass any legal problems of being mistaken for an LEO by yelling "Police".
-
Perhaps it would be better to yell "the police are on they" or "they have been called" that would probably bypass any legal problems of being mistaken for an LEO by yelling "Police".
Shut up, grab your loved ones, and take cover!
Based on the description it is not your fight ... yet. Do not insert yourself!
-
Perhaps it would be better to yell "the police are on they" or "they have been called" that would probably bypass any legal problems of being mistaken for an LEO by yelling "Police".
Just following the advice of Mas Ayoob. You aren't identifying yourself as a Police Officer, you are calling for one.
As long as we are here, I'll post my feelings on not getting involved... I've not mentioned it in previous threads where it came up...
Maybe my post on the discussion of the Warsaw Ghetto has it fresh in my mind.
I would probably be asking for a world of hurt and hard times, but I simply could not not get involved if I was in a position to stop further killings.
I could not "get safe" and leave others to die if I possessed the skill and opportunity to to save lives.
A lot of folks in Germany got safe and let the NAZI's take the Jews...and many of them were the Jews themselves.
We have often talked of Wolves, Sheep and Sheep Dogs and picture ourselves as the Sheep Dogs, but the Sheep Dogs don't get safe.
A few days ago, I came across an old post that spoke to a situation where a gunman was robbing a store with a gun pointed at the clerk. The comment was that the poster would not get involved unless the gunman shot the clerk.
I simply could not do that. If someone presents a gun in the commission of a crime, I take that as intent to do serious to fatal harm along with the ability and opportunity. If I have a good shot, I'd take it.
Even though I don't shave any more, I do look at myself in the mirror and I'd not know that I could do that if I hesitated or got safe and the clerk was killed or injured.
Yeah, I'm not a cop so it's not my job, but, for me, it is my moral responsibility.
It might not be the smart or wise thing to do, but, for me, it is the right thing to do.
Let me state that I am only pointing out how I would make my own moral decisions, and not condemning any who would make a different one.
-
Depends on circumstances, but I'm a cynic .
Maybe the person getting assaulted really deserves, or needs it.
It wasn't my beef to begin with, I'm not making it my beef.
-
Getting involved in a violent event is a personal moral decision, and I respect your decision. Each person would have to make up their own decision on this. I personally would never get involved, unless it is absolutely 100 percent clear to me who the bad guy is and the victim is a true defenseless innocent. For me, that is pretty much limited to a child in mortal danger. If the person being attacked is an adult stranger, I'm not going to risk my own life for them, and that's my moral decision. First, I'll never be 100% certain that shooting victim is truly innocent, even if it's a store clerk or a 100 pound woman. For all I know, the clerk or the woman was selling drugs on the side and the shooter is exacting revenge for a deal gone bad. Second, that person is old enough to take responsibility to prepare for their own defense and protection, not me. I'm a sheepdog for my family, not another flock.
Concerning the Warsaw ghetto scenario. That's just a plain no-win situation and you will be shot dead. Better to live, prepare and fight back smarter another day.
-
Absolutely right on not yelling "police". That will land you in jail quicker than lightening where I live.
As mentioned, take cover and get loved one's out of harms way. Call 911. Keep observing the area and report anything you see to dispatch. Be sure to let dispatch know who you are and what you are wearing. All this will be passed on to the approaching officers. Be a good witness.
Only use force if you or others are in danger. If they are shooting at you. Shoot back. Cops won't be shooting at someone for no reason.
-
Absolutely right on not yelling "police". That will land you in jail quicker than lightening where I live.
As mentioned, take cover and get loved one's out of harms way. Call 911. Keep observing the area and report anything you see to dispatch. Be sure to let dispatch know who you are and what you are wearing. All this will be passed on to the approaching officers. Be a good witness.
Only use force if you or others are in danger. If they are shooting at you. Shoot back. Cops won't be shooting at someone for no reason.
That is exactly my point. If someone is holding a gun on someone, they are in danger. In the store clerk example, you are in the store, the bad guy pulls the gun and points it at the clerk and makes demands. No matter how I look at it, that clerk is in life threatening danger.
Call 911? I don't think it would be different there.... When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
-
That is exactly my point. If someone is holding a gun on someone, they are in danger. In the store clerk example, you are in the store, the bad guy pulls the gun and points it at the clerk and makes demands. No matter how I look at it, that clerk is in life threatening danger.
Call 911? I don't think it would be different there.... When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Is it worth possibly getting yourself killed or injured over someone else's insured money ?
-
How do you know the person with the gun is the trashie? Could be the people on the ground are the baddies. Stay out of it unless attacked or until the police arrive.
-
How do you know the person with the gun is the trashie? Could be the people on the ground are the baddies. Stay out of it unless attacked or until the police arrive.
I drifted from the OP. There was way to little information to even make any kind of statement.
It was like saying someone shot someone, who are you gonna shoot?
-
Is it worth possibly getting yourself killed or injured over someone else's insured money ?
I wasn't concerned about the money, but the clerk facing the gun. To me the clerk is worth taking the risk.
If your dad was the clerk and was at the point of the gun and a armed stranger decided to get save out the side door and your father was shot, would you compliment the stranger on his wise decision to beat it rather than take his shot and stop the bad guy?
-
Read this and think about what would happen if the good samaritans were armed. http://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/2012/08/plainfield_thief_escapes_when.html
-
Read this and think about what would happen if the good samaritans were armed. http://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/2012/08/plainfield_thief_escapes_when.html
Covers my and some others' points on here about not getting involved if you are not forced into it or have full knowledge of the players.
-
I drifted from the OP. There was way to little information to even make any kind of statement.
It was like saying someone shot someone, who are you gonna shoot?
That's how life works Solus
I wasn't concerned about the money, but the clerk facing the gun. To me the clerk is worth taking the risk.
If your dad was the clerk and was at the point of the gun and a armed stranger decided to get save out the side door and your father was shot, would you compliment the stranger on his wise decision to beat it rather than take his shot and stop the bad guy?
So basically you think it is a good idea to start a gunfight with someone else's head under the gun ?
Your example sucks because the clerks who get shot are usually the ones who don't just give up the INSURED cash.
I sure as hell would not want some f*cking hero wanna be starting a gun fight when the other gun was pointing at the old mans head.
Dude, you are a menace.
-
That's how life works Solus
So basically you think it is a good idea to start a gunfight with someone else's head under the gun ?
Your example sucks because the clerks who get shot are usually the ones who don't just give up the INSURED cash.
I sure as hell would not want some f*cking hero wanna be starting a gun fight when the other gun was pointing at the old mans head.
Dude, you are a menace.
So I take it you would congratulate the guy for watching your father die when he could have save him? Maybe give him a high five for being a safe citizen?
I, for one, would not want to be making this report to an officer after getting safe and being a good witness.
"Yes, Officer, I was in the store when the bad gun came in and pointed a gun at the clerk and made demands. I was able to slip out the door and watched from across the street. I saw the clerk hand over the insured cash, but I guess it wasn't enough because the bad guy shot him any way. The bad guy then grabbed a carton of cigarettes and a 12 pace of beer and on the way past the clerk he kick the clerk. I saw the clerk move, so I guess he wasn't dead yet. The bad guy shot him in the chest but the clerk was still moving so he shot him in the head.
I have a Concealed Carry permit and am armed and I had a good clear shot at the bad guy before I left the store and could put him down, but it's not my job.
Too bad you guys didn't get here a few minutes sooner, you might have saved the old guys life. C'est la vie."
I could not be satisfied with myself if those were my actions. YMMV.
-
With out some "do gooder" changing the dynamic there would most likely be no shooting.
That's the part you don't seem able to comprehend. YOU are the idiot escalating the situation .
Besides, the Old Man is quite capable of dealing with his own situations.
-
If your dad was the clerk and was at the point of the gun and a armed stranger decided to get save out the side door and your father was shot, would you compliment the stranger on his wise decision to beat it rather than take his shot and stop the bad guy?
Now the scenario has completely changed. If the threatened person is a stranger to me, no way would I get involved, unless it's a child. If it's my dad, sister, friend, wife, etc, then of course I would react differently. I'm pretty sure the OP was implying that you stumbled upon a shooting scenario involving people you don't know.
-
We had a situation here a few years back where an off duty security cop (not a town or Boston cop) happened upon a guy stabbing a nurse in a local Boston hospital. He was armed, drew his sidearm and killed the guy. In that scenario, based on his perception of what was happening, he acted! Was it appropriate action as a private citizen? I don't know, that wasn't my call and I wasn't there.
The state did not press charges on the shooter and he was heralded as a local hero for about 15 minutes!
The OP is way too vague and has too many variables that would force me to retreat to a safe place and get on the phone. If threatened, the dynamic has just changed to something that forces further action.
-
Now the scenario has completely changed. If the threatened person is a stranger to me, no way would I get involved, unless it's a child. If it's my dad, sister, friend, wife, etc, then of course I would react differently. I'm pretty sure the OP was implying that you stumbled upon a shooting scenario involving people you don't know.
yeah...I sort of hijacked the thread to take it from a tactical question to a moral one.
Your answer is interesting.
The difference you specify implies that you would act differently if the life/well being of the person under the gun meant more to you than the life of stranger who happened to be the clerk.
The others here who have posted reasons for not getting involved. Many of those reasons would still apply if the clerk was a loved one of yours. With that, would you still avoid getting involved?
I don't need an answer unless you choose to give one.... We just need to know what and why we think what we do.
-
With out some "do gooder" changing the dynamic there would most likely be no shooting.
That's the part you don't seem able to comprehend. YOU are the idiot escalating the situation .
Besides, the Old Man is quite capable of dealing with his own situations.
When the bad guy pulled the gun he escalated the situation to an imminent life or death affair. My killing him would de-escalate it to a police investigation.
So, again, if it was your old man behind the counter when the gun was drawn, you would duck out the side and get safe because h e can take care of himself?
One last thing, Tom...If you don't call me an idiot any more, I won't call you a coward.
-
Solus changing the person under attack from a stranger to a family member is only moral in terms of knowing the situation. Could it be that if it were a family member you would have an understanding of the roles of the players. That is the key in this: Who is the bad guy, and who is reacting to it?
-
When the bad guy pulled the gun he escalated the situation to an imminent life or death affair. My killing him would de-escalate it to a police investigation.
So, again, if it was your old man behind the counter when the gun was drawn, you would duck out the side and get safe because h e can take care of himself?
One last thing, Tom...If you don't call me an idiot any more, I won't call you a coward.
I wasn't calling "you" an idiot, I was calling any person who needlessly intervenes in what had been a simple robbery an idiot.
As for calling me a coward, call me anything you like.
I've been called worse names by better people.
-
Solus changing the person under attack from a stranger to a family member is only moral in terms of knowing the situation. Could it be that if it were a family member you would have an understanding of the roles of the players. That is the key in this: Who is the bad guy, and who is reacting to it?
How much do we need to know?
The clerk is working the counter and the bad guy draws a gun to rob the place while threatening the clerk with death, that threat being implicit in the presence of the drawn gun.
Does it matter that the clerk might be sleeping with the bad guy's mate? Or any other history the two might have?
The means to settle that history is not with an armed robbery.
I would choose to intervene. To me the life of that clerk, as flawed and dark as it might, unbeknownst to me, be is worth the risk of my life.
Others would not take the risk for a stranger, but would for a friend or loved one.
And there are still others, I would assume, who would not take that risk for anyone.
I don't think a personal understanding of the background of a loved one carries as much weight in the decision as the value of the life of the person being threatened has to you.
-
I wasn't calling "you" an idiot, I was calling any person who needlessly intervenes in what had been a simple robbery an idiot.
As for calling me a coward, call me anything you like.
I've been called worse names by better people.
I guess the disagreement is about what is needless intervention. In my thinking, anytime someone threatens someone by pointing a gun at them during the commission of a crime, intervention becomes immediately necessary and should be performed as soon as it can be reasonably done.
Not being a legal scholar I don't know all the definitions, but I don't consider armed robbery as simple robbery?
As for calling you names...take THIS YOU DEMOCRAT!!!
-
Solus,
Very rare that you are ever going to get me to say "shoot him" in a debate like this. It is a personal decision made when actively involved, and I am not going open myself to legal issues if you, someone else, or I am ever involved in a shooting. I don't need to be responsible or held responsible for advising or speculating it is cut and dried simple.
-
Solus,
Very rare that you are ever going to get me to say "shoot him" in a debate like this. It is a personal decision made when actively involved, and I am not going open myself to legal issues if you, someone else, or I am ever involved in a shooting. I don't need to be responsible or held responsible for advising or speculating it is cut and dried simple.
Understood
-
... I would choose to intervene. To me the life of that clerk, as flawed and dark as it might, unbeknownst to me, be is worth the risk of my life. ...
Good debate here... and this is something we should all have thought about before carrying a gun.
Solus, I have a question about your statement quoted above. Since I don't know your personal or family situation, please forgive me if this question doesn't apply. You may be willing to risk your life for a stranger but what about your wife, kids, grandkids, friends, and everyone else whose lives are touched by your being here on this earth? Are you also willing to risk their pain, sorrow, and grief for the stranger?
I'm not judging your position - I just wonder if you considered the "ripple effect" of your choice.
-
yeah...I sort of hijacked the thread to take it from a tactical question to a moral one.
Your answer is interesting.
The difference you specify implies that you would act differently if the life/well being of the person under the gun meant more to you than the life of stranger who happened to be the clerk.
The others here who have posted reasons for not getting involved. Many of those reasons would still apply if the clerk was a loved one of yours. With that, would you still avoid getting involved?
I don't need an answer unless you choose to give one.... We just need to know what and why we think what we do.
I have two reasons why I would never get involved in a violent encounter involving only strangers. The first I already stated but will reiterate again. I cannot tell with absolute certainty who is the bad guy and who is the good guy. It may look clear but looks can sometimes be deceiving. I'm not willing to shoot an undercover cop if I misjudge the event. Now if it is 99.9% clear who the bad guy is, I will still not get involved because of my second reason. And that is my primary duty to my own family. My wife and kids depend on me. Just because I insert myself into that situation doesn't mean it's going to get resolved my way. I could pump several rounds into the criminal but I can't guarantee that will take him down or wont have enough fight left in him to fire on me and possibly kill me. If that makes me an anti-hero coward, so be it. I'll be alive and my kids will still have a dad. Like I said, I'm a sheepdog for my flock, not another flock.
-
I have two reasons why I would never get involved in a violent encounter involving only strangers. The first I already stated but will reiterate again. I cannot tell with absolute certainty who is the bad guy and who is the good guy. It may look clear but looks can sometimes be deceiving. I'm not willing to shoot an undercover cop if I misjudge the event. Now if it is 99.9% clear who the bad guy is, I will still not get involved because of my second reason. And that is my primary duty to my own family. My wife and kids depend on me. Just because I insert myself into that situation doesn't mean it's going to get resolved my way. I could pump several rounds into the criminal but I can't guarantee that will take him down or wont have enough fight left in him to fire on me and possibly kill me. If that makes me an anti-hero coward, so be it. I'll be alive and my kids will still have a dad. Like I said, I'm a sheepdog for my flock, not another flock.
I do understand your position and I had inferred it from your previous comments.
But now I ask this. Instead of it being a stranger with the gun pointed at them, it was your loved one instead, how long would you hesitate and, perhaps, allow the one pointing the gun to fire while considering if he was an undercover cop or not?
I know the situation is unlikely, but if you did walk into a room and see a stranger pointing a loved one. How would your response differ? And it might be useful (it is to me, but I delve in detail about my motives) to understand why there is a difference.
I am not judging. I have my decided my "moral course of action" and I hope, if the time comes, I can live up to it. I have done so before, but now with firearms involved, only bare hands.
I do not judge another's "moral choices" except where they intersect the law, which is basically lying, cheating, stealing and murder....which also happen to be my moral choices. However, where to worship, Who to worship, who to love and what to put into your mouth are not "moral choices" that should also be laws.
-
Good debate here... and this is something we should all have thought about before carrying a gun.
Solus, I have a question about your statement quoted above. Since I don't know your personal or family situation, please forgive me if this question doesn't apply. You may be willing to risk your life for a stranger but what about your wife, kids, grandkids, friends, and everyone else whose lives are touched by your being here on this earth? Are you also willing to risk their pain, sorrow, and grief for the stranger?
I'm not judging your position - I just wonder if you considered the "ripple effect" of your choice.
I do understand the point of the question and have considered it myself. I am divorced with no children, so I am responsible to myself and my conscience.
But I do recall a news event I saw. It was about a accident where a passenger car collided with a tanker truck.
The occupants of both vehicles were freed except for a 5 year old girl trapped in the car under the truck. The tank was leaking and had caught on fire and was spreading towards the car.
A fire department was working the accident and they had several men at the car working to free the girl. The fire was spreading and growing and got close enough to the car that the chief called the men out. All but one went. He remained to stay with the girl.
The firemen focused all the hoses on the pair under the truck and it exploded. Both the fireman and the girl survived unharmed by the fire.
Afterwards the fireman gave a statement. He was married and had a family. He said that he also had a little girl about the same age as the girl trapped. He said he had thought of his family loosing him, but the girl was so frightened, he just could not leave her to face death, and likely die, alone. He said he had hopped that if he daughter was ever in the same situation, that someone would be there to be with her.
.......
I know it isn't the same situation, but his concerns about his family were the same. He decided to risk his family loosing him to do what he felt was the right thing to do.
Maybe if he didn't have a family, a little girl about that age, he might have been more prone to leave the girl alone and withdraw when the call to do so came.
In any case, there is more at work than just the risk of your family loosing you involved in all of this.
And as far as being a hero goes, it might be said that the fireman took the easy way...he stayed with the girl because his emotions overwhelmed him when he should have be strong enough to leave and honor his duty to his family.
My intent is not to blame someone for their choice, but just to have those choices considered ......in more depth than most non-compulsive folks would care to. ;D
-
If it wasn't a stranger, but a loved one, facing a shooter, I would do everything in my power to take them down without hesitation. I thought I was clear but I guess not. Again, if the stranger was a clear innocent child, I would get involved. That's my moral line in the sand.
-
... so I am responsible to myself and my conscience. ...
Thank you... I appreciate the thoughtful and well-composed response.
It's a uniquely human thing we do - weighing and balancing duty, morality, spirituality, legality, patriotism, and ethics. We each prioritize these according to some instinctive, genetic, or divine recipe that leaves us prepared to play our appointed role. I start each day with a prayer for strength, courage, and receptiveness to God's direction.
I believe that in a critical event, or a moment of deep despair, we all have the ability to do what's right if we only listen. Some refer to it as a "little voice" or a "gut feeling" - I prefer to think of it as God's suggestion. The free will of man always allows for the opportunity to mess things up but if we prayerfully strive to do His will then we will be provided all that is required when called upon to take action.
-
Thank you... I appreciate the thoughtful and well-composed response.
It's a uniquely human thing we do - weighing and balancing duty, morality, spirituality, legality, patriotism, and ethics. We each prioritize these according to some instinctive, genetic, or divine recipe that leaves us prepared to play our appointed role. I start each day with a prayer for strength, courage, and receptiveness to God's direction.
I believe that in a critical event, or a moment of deep despair, we all have the ability to do what's right if we only listen. Some refer to it as a "little voice" or a "gut feeling" - I prefer to think of it as God's suggestion. The free will of man always allows for the opportunity to mess things up but if we prayerfully strive to do His will then we will be provided all that is required when called upon to take action.
+1
Well said.
-
With out some "do gooder" changing the dynamic there would most likely be no shooting.
That's the part you don't seem able to comprehend. YOU are the idiot escalating the situation .
Besides, the Old Man is quite capable of dealing with his own situations.
Tell that to the two north central Iowa convenience store clerks who were shot in the head and killed by some douchebag, loser, psycho teenager a couple of years ago AFTER handing over the insured money, cigarettes, and everything else the kid demanded.....simply because he didn't want them to be able to call the cops.
While I don't think that one should insert one's self into the situation in every scenario, I'm also not ready to say we shouldn't EVER insert ourselves into a scenario.
All that being said, sometimes it does come down to a matter of conscience. And in that realm, the answer that each individual comes up with is the right answer for that person.