# How far would you go to protect others?



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

In this political climate, how far would you go to protect others that refuse to carry a gun on their own to protect themselves, even may be calling you a gun nut.
Would you stay, and not jump into safety out the window because there are others that cannot escape and a shooter is on the loose?

My opinion is, if everyone would protect themselves instead of listening to typical political daydreams and gun haters, there would be no shootings in offices or gas stations, we all know that. We know also that there would be half the shootings if the thugs would not be protected by liberals and media.

Who would go to jail, spent a ton of money on attorney fees and court bail out to protect someone that refuses to protect themselves, and reports you to the your supervisor on the job, because s/he feels uncomfortable with a gun in the meeting? 

I fight and protect for me and my loved ones. When others do the same we become an army that no thug and no liberal politician can break.

I jump if I can and watch what happen furthermore in that office/gas station on local TV around the corner, drinking Pepsi in Pizza Hut. Sorry.


----------



## Wyoming_1977 (Feb 24, 2016)

I'm looking out for me and me only. Everyone else is on their own.

I have no family. I have no friends. I have no loved ones. I don't have any responsibility beyond myself.


----------



## Donn (Jul 26, 2013)

This is a very volatile subject, as you'll soon find out. I figure pretty much every man and/or woman has the same option I did. That is to go to the same time, trouble and expense to defend themselves as those of us here have. If someone chooses not to, that's on them. It's not incumbent on me to step in and defend them. Are there exceptions? I suppose. I'll deal with them when/if they happen. In the meantime, I'm an armed citizen, not defender of the realm.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

You do what is right, regardless of jail, court, or even a thank you.

If you're not sure what is 'right', then get some training and learn form the best. 
This may require some extensive study, even soul searching [are you really ready to do what needs to be done when called?].


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

CW said:


> You do what is right, regardless of jail, court, or even a thank you.


I'm generally of the mind that I am not about to give up my freedom or my assets to protect some stranger who is not willing to protect themselves. I _would _treat individual situations as just that; individual situations. But generally, I am not of a mind to put myself or my property in jeopardy for someone not willing to take the necessary precautions and means to do for themselves.

This especially applies to someone who is anti-gun/anti-self defense. As far as they go, I wouldn't want to waste the ammunition on them.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

I came up with that question because we had recently a meeting where some people walked out because they expected concealed guns in the meeting room. How is that? Simple, the company allows us to carry concealed guns in the office starting January 2016. 

They argue that our office is , because of the nature of our business, always target, could be - at least for some areas of our job. They are hard core liberals and believe religiously anything and everything what comes out of MSNBC. They argue that a concealed weapon, for some reason, would draw the attention of a shooter to them when a concealed weapon would be around etc... 
2 years ago, a lady in our office, secretly placed a 9 mm FMJ round next to the Copy machine on a table. The office was a blast, Security was called and they thought, because of that hysterical screaming that went on, a shooter is in the house. Some of this liberals begun sitting in their cubical to cry in their hysteria. "No Sir" that is no joke.

I sit there sometimes and in this meetings and think, would I really try to protect them and if I do would they sue me thereafter because I did? Liberals are very strange characters.

I lived in Europe and Australia in the liberal paradises long enough to know what is coming. The republican party at the moment does really everything they possibly can to make sure that the presidentsy is handed to Hillary on a Silver Platter.

That is the reason for me asking. Would you risk years and years of Prison-time and the welfare of your family, if you harm that thug by protecting people that believe in a Nanny State and refuse to take care for themselves, may even sue you thereafter?


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

CW said:


> You do what is right, regardless of jail, court, or even a thank you.
> 
> If you're not sure what is 'right', then get some training and learn form the best.
> This may require some extensive study, even soul searching [are you really ready to do what needs to be done when called?].


I don't really know CW. But I am definitely not the Police and I am definitely not the Army. Doing what is right? Well ask the liberals what is right. I promise you, you will be very surprised.

I was long enough in the German Army and than in the US Army for 20 years. I'll think I had my fair share on protecting others and even more so when I learned how they really thank the soldiers.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

CW said:


> *You do what is right, regardless of jail, court, or even a thank you.*
> 
> If you're not sure what is 'right', then get some training and learn form the best.
> This may require some extensive study, even soul searching [are you really ready to do what needs to be done when called?].


I'm with you there, "CW". I've never been in a situation where someone's life was at stake. Probably never will, and hope to Christ I never will be. However I'd like to think that I would not stand idly by while some innocent person(s) life was being taken away by some raving maniac especially while having the means to prevent it. After all that person(s) could be someone's wife, mother, father, child, etc. What if it was one of your own loved ones that was being attacked yet no one lifted a finger to stop it? I'll bet most of us would be pretty pissed off at the inaction of strangers for allowing it to happen. Remember Kitty Genovese? --https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese. *Of course every situation presents it's own set of circumstances all of which has to be taken into consideration before taking any kind of action.*


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

Hopefully my statement will spur more discussion.

For myself, I frame the thought as I expect a policeman would: You do what is right. 
And there certainly is a portion of society that is thankless for the sacrifices many of them make.

Yet there is the rational of the Darwinian Method which simply says let the weak and ignorant perish, it will improve society.

So the discussion hinges on: What is Right? [you can also add the caveat - For this situation?]


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

CW said:


> Hopefully my statement will spur more discussion.
> 
> For myself, I frame the thought as I expect a policeman would: You do what is right.
> And there certainly is a portion of society that is thankless for the sacrifices many of them make.
> ...


 Ok , in principle I would agree with you , and of course every given situation has it's individual parameters. However , like others here I'm pretty much sick and tired of those who would vilify all who own a firearm , much less carry for defensive purposes and then turn around and hypocritically expect/demand that the given firearms owner protect them while they cower like the snotty sheep they so resemble.

I put up with the rhetoric from the public about the Armed Services while I was in , along with the same hypocritical stance AND the treatment of service members as a lower class of citizen/form of life coupled with the demanding expectation that we fight for them................all in all it 'bout amounts to........

" Protect us Slave.".................


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)




----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

PT111Pro said:


> View attachment 2125


 Yup , kind of interesting when you're sitting at a light in Overtown and two wanna-be thugs walk up and say " we're takin yo ride Mon" only to notice the .452 tunnel that appeared as they were approaching , coupled with the words " Are you real sure about that Boy?".............they seem to have other things to do 'long about then.

A prudent man does jump the light and split right after that though , it IS Overtown and they may well have other friends who may be very well armed.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Freethought said:


> Ok , in principle I would agree with you , and of course every given situation has it's individual parameters. *However , like others here I'm pretty much sick and tired of those who would vilify all who own a firearm , much less carry for defensive purposes and then turn around and hypocritically expect/demand that the given firearms owner protect them while they cower like the snotty sheep they so resemble.*
> 
> I put up with the rhetoric from the public about the Armed Services while I was in , along with the same hypocritical stance AND the treatment of service members as a lower class of citizen/form of life coupled with the demanding expectation that we fight for them................all in all it 'bout amounts to........
> 
> " Protect us Slave.".................


Good points! However, how would anyone know if the person who's life they just saved is one of "us" or one of "them"? I don't think that the people who are against us expect us to do anything, let alone defend them. For them the government is their answer to everything from cradle to grave. They live in a delusional fantasy world of "if only's". With absolutely no conception of reality.

At least in the state in which I live, Arizona and seeing you're from Alaska I'd be willing to bet that most of the people who reside in our respective state's are on our side. At any given place or time you can be assured that there will be at least one or more people legally carrying a firearm.


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

desertman said:


> Good points! However, how would anyone know if the person who's life they just saved is one of "us" or one of "them"? I don't think that the people who are against us expect us to do anything, let alone defend them. For them the government is their answer to everything from cradle to grave. They live in a delusional fantasy world of "if only's". With absolutely no conception of reality.
> 
> At least in the state in which I live, Arizona and seeing you're from Alaska I'd be willing to bet that most of the people who reside in our respective state's are on our side. At any given place or time you can be assured that there will be at least one or more people legally carrying a firearm.


 I spend quite a bit of time in the Outside , Montana and S/W Texas. In all those locales yes you can be assured that there are other folks who are armed. In Alaska since most of my time is spent out of town , and the towns I am in with any degree of frequency aren't even " towns" by the standards of most folks in the lower 48.......the *majority* of folks are armed. And I do mean the overwhelming majority , someone who would walk into McGrath for a drink or a meal , or run a four wheeler ( or sled in the winter) in for supplies unarmed would be looked on as highly eccentric , perhaps as suicidal. You're not at the top of the food chain up here , no matter what you might be carrying , and some of the herbivores are just as dangerous as the bears are. Not to mention the basic fact that should one encounter a two-legged coyote in the bush they are generally pretty bad folks and it's up to YOU to protect yourself since in some cases/situations the " law " may be DAYS away.


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

desertman said:


> Good points! However, how would anyone know if the person who's life they just saved is one of "us" or one of "them"? I don't think that the people who are against us expect us to do anything, let alone defend them. For them the government is their answer to everything from cradle to grave. They live in a delusional fantasy world of "if only's". With absolutely no conception of reality.


 I'd have to disagree with the above. And that's based upon hearing it directly from snooty , snotty liberal yuppies in places like Missoula and Kalispell i.e. " I don't have to worry about that , these asshole cowboys will shoot the assailant for me.".............that's a *direct* quote by the way , and that attitude permeates the culture in certain locales up and down the Rockies. You should see what Jackson Hole has turned into nowadays , Teton county SD and JHPD both will attempt to get around the Wyoming carry laws for residents , AND CCW permits that are valid in Wyoming. We won't even discuss certain parts of Colo in which the residents are gonna run screaming in terror at the sight of a firearm like a SFBayArea Yuppoid.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> I'm with you there, "CW". I've never been in a situation where someone's life was at stake. Probably never will, and hope to Christ I never will be. However I'd like to think that I would not stand idly by while some innocent person(s) life was being taken away by some raving maniac especially while having the means to prevent it. After all that person(s) could be someone's wife, mother, father, child, etc. What if it was one of your own loved ones that was being attacked yet no one lifted a finger to stop it? I'll bet most of us would be pretty pissed off at the inaction of strangers for allowing it to happen. Remember Kitty Genovese? --https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese. *Of course every situation presents it's own set of circumstances all of which has to be taken into consideration before taking any kind of action.*





CW said:


> Hopefully my statement will spur more discussion.
> 
> For myself, I frame the thought as I expect a policeman would: You do what is right.
> And there certainly is a portion of society that is thankless for the sacrifices many of them make.
> ...


That's why I wrote this in my response...

*"I would treat individual situations as just that; individual situations."*

No two situations are going to be the same and therefore, there is no pat answer or response which will work across the board in every sense. I prefer to leave this door open and not say definitively what I would or would not do since I have no way of knowing in advance the scope or character of a given situation.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Freethought said:


> I spend quite a bit of time in the Outside , Montana and S/W Texas. In all those locales yes you can be assured that there are other folks who are armed. In Alaska since most of my time is spent out of town , *and the towns I am in with any degree of frequency aren't even " towns" by the standards of most folks in the lower 48*.......the *majority* of folks are armed. And I do mean the overwhelming majority , someone who would walk into McGrath for a drink or a meal , or run a four wheeler ( or sled in the winter) in for supplies unarmed would be looked on as highly eccentric , perhaps as suicidal. You're not at the top of the food chain up here , no matter what you might be carrying , and some of the herbivores are just as dangerous as the bears are. Not to mention the basic fact that should one encounter a two-legged coyote in the bush they are generally pretty bad folks and it's up to YOU to protect yourself since in some cases/situations the " law " may be DAYS away.


Although not nearly as remote as Alaska, (I've never been there) we also have our share of some pretty remote "towns" where law enforcement is at least 45 minutes away. To live in these places could also be considered suicidal if unarmed. But at least in our states those who have the intention of doing us any harm will never know who they are picking on. Chances are that their potential victims will not end up being victims at all. Taking into consideration that guns have always been a way of life here and people know how to use them. Contrast that with states that have effectively disarmed all but the rich and powerful such as my neighboring state to the west California, and at the other end of the spectrum New York and New Jersey, can't forget Illinois.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> That's why I wrote this in my response...
> 
> *"I would treat individual situations as just that; individual situations."*
> 
> No two situations are going to be the same and therefore, there is no pat answer or response which will work across the board in every sense. I prefer to leave this door open and not say definitively what I would or would not do since I have no way of knowing in advance the scope or character of a given situation.


I hope you didn't misunderstand my post, we're in total agreement. If a situation doesn't warrant it, I'm not about to risk my life or that of another innocent person by taking any type of action. Many people have drowned while trying to save a person from drowning. Fat chance of that out in the middle of the desert though.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Freethought said:


> *I'd have to disagree with the above. And that's based upon hearing it directly from snooty , snotty liberal yuppies in places like Missoula and Kalispell i.e.* " I don't have to worry about that , these asshole cowboys will shoot the assailant for me.".............that's a *direct* quote by the way , and that attitude permeates the culture in certain locales up and down the Rockies. You should see what Jackson Hole has turned into nowadays , Teton county SD and JHPD both will attempt to get around the Wyoming carry laws for residents , AND CCW permits that are valid in Wyoming. We won't even discuss certain parts of Colo in which the residents are gonna run screaming in terror at the sight of a firearm like a SFBayArea Yuppoid.


I'm with you 100% regarding those types of people. They've invaded parts of Arizona too. Made stupid and hysterical comments regarding the carrying and possession of firearms in the local papers, some on a regular basis. If they do not like it here then California should be more to their liking. They've got no business coming here trying to screw up this state after successfully screwing up their own. But you can not let a bunch of asinine quotes from a bunch of snotty Liberal yuppies dissuade you from taking the appropriate action if there is any way possible to save someone's life without undo risk to your own. There will be no time to ask whether the person is a snotty Liberal yuppie or a Constitutional Conservative such as I am. If it were the "Black Militant in Chief" or the pathological lying bitch from Arkansas, her scumbag husband (literally), the little Commie bastard from Vermont, "I'll Duce" Cuomo, Michael Bloomberg etc. you bet your ass I'd walk away. However those hypocrites have armed protection 24/7, some at our expense so it's unlikely anyone would have to intervene on their behalf. One never knows you may need someone to intervene on your behalf someday not necessarily from a criminal attack. Would you want them to ask you what your political positions are before rendering any aid?


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

desertman said:


> Although not nearly as remote as Alaska, (I've never been there) we also have our share of some pretty remote "towns" where law enforcement is at least 45 minutes away. To live in these places could also be considered suicidal if unarmed. But at least in our states those who have the intention of doing us any harm will never know who they are picking on. Chances are that their potential victims will not end up being victims at all. Taking into consideration that guns have always been a way of life here and people know how to use them. Contrast that with states that have effectively disarmed all but the rich and powerful such as my neighboring state to the west California, and at the other end of the spectrum New York and New Jersey, can't forget Illinois.


 Oh don't get me started on Calif , though you'll note that several of the northern counties are *shall issue* as far as CCW and the permit is good statewide , though that still won't help you much in SF when the driver you're with gets stopped and you observe the " duty to inform " , and subsequently find yourself in the tank for six hours even though you have a legal CCW , then they will try to KEEP a 2100 dollar Les Baer 1911 , finally returning it seven weeks later after repeated contact by your personal attorney and then threat of action by the Tehama County DA's office.

And then you have transporting (legally mind you , locked cases etc. ammunition in separate lockbox) rifles to the Great Ground Squirrel Shoot in Modoc County and 4 hours in a rest stop off I-5 after a CHP officer observes rifle cases in the back of a Subaru Forester............" Don't you guys think seven rifles is a lot for two men?".......which of course ISN'T for serious varminters and a four day varmint shoot , not to mention the amount of ammunition involved.

That started as " Do you have firearms in the car?".................Yes sire we do............" sit down on the curb over there and do not approach the vehicle"............ an arguement ensued between CHP and Shasta County when SCSD showed up and a deputy for the SD told them , and I quote............" you State guys are being f888ing ridiculous"......

Yeah the firearms laws are part of the reason I no longer live in Calif , along with liberal nannies , taxation , hirrible environment for small business , liberal nannies that want to run your life , water problems , increasingly restrictive edicts on EVERYTHINg.................and did I mention the liberal nannies that know what's best for everybody........


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

desertman said:


> I'm with you 100% regarding those types of people. They've invaded parts of Arizona too. Made stupid and hysterical comments regarding the carrying and possession of firearms in the local papers, some on a regular basis. If they do not like it here then California should be more to their liking. They've got no business coming here trying to screw up this state after successfully screwing up their own. But you can not let a bunch of asinine quotes from a bunch of snotty Liberal yuppies dissuade you from taking the appropriate action if there is any way possible to save someone's life without undo risk to your own. There will be no time to ask whether the person is a snotty Liberal yuppie or a Constitutional Conservative such as I am. If it were the "Black Militant in Chief" or the pathological lying bitch from Arkansas, her scumbag husband (literally), the little Commie bastard from Vermont, "I'll Duce" Cuomo, Michael Bloomberg etc. you bet your ass I'd walk away. However those hypocrites have armed protection 24/7, some at our expense so it's unlikely anyone would have to intervene on their behalf. One never knows you may need someone to intervene on your behalf someday not necessarily from a criminal attack. Would you want them to ask you what your political positions are before rendering any aid?


 Oh I'll bitch about it here but I'd be unlikely to stand by idly whilst someone shot up a bunch of civilians and non-combatants.

That said , my attitude is colored by the crap I got repeatedly from folks about what I did within the military. To the point that I no longer let anyone know , if the do know and ask what I did they get a "none of your damn business" answer usually. The one exception being other veterans of certain groups/MOS s and such folks generally have a sort of radar for each other anyway.

As per THAT , here's the unfortunate FACT , socially speaking.............the public wants warriors when they perceive a "need"..............otherwise said folks are an embarassment and supposed to just go away and crawl down a hole............like I stated the attitude is one of.

" Defend ME , SLAVE."

Example: jacka**es in Hollyweird who run their yaps about firearms , the US military etc...............while ramping up their personal armed security and looking for qualified individuals with the training and combat experience to accomplish that task efficiently.

But hey according to them the rank and file member of the public shouldn't have access to a weapon.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Freethought said:


> ...the public wants warriors when they perceive a "need"..............otherwise said folks are an embarassment and supposed to just go away and crawl down a hole...


"...O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, go away';
But it's 'Thank you, Mister Atkins,' when the band begins to play..."

See the poem, _Tommy_, by Rudyard Kipling.
Click on: Poetry Lovers' Page - Rudyard Kipling: Tommy


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

It all. depends on what you can sleep with! You are the one who has to live with you. Your values and training should guide your decision which would have to be made in a second


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

tony pasley said:


> *It all. depends on what you can sleep with!* You are the one who has to live with you. Your values and training should guide your decision which would have to be made in a second


I don't know, I think it would haunt me the rest of my life knowing I had the ability to save someone's life but didn't. Again it would all depend on the circumstances.


----------



## MoMan (Dec 27, 2010)

I am of the mindset that my main responsibility is to extricate my loved ones first, then myself. I have no intention of playing policeman. That being said, I certainly would not stand by while someone was working over an elder person or a woman. Active shooter, I'm sorry but you guys do what you think is right, I'll get my behind out of there any way I have to. If that means taking out the threat, so be it. If it means sneaking out the backdoor, then that's what I intend to do. 

I certainly am not going to put everything I've worked my entire life for on the line so I can be sued by not only the perps family, but probably even some of the people that I might have saved. Sorry not gonna happen.

I'm sure this will not be a popular stand to take. However, when I decided to become a responsible handgun owner, and spent my time and money to become properly trained to handled different situations, I did not do so with the intention of becoming a hero.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Real Heros are death
or other heroes are in a wheel chair and homeless without healthcare.

But don't worry. The Government, Obama and Hilary take care on the hero like they did with the ones in Benghazi...


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> I hope you didn't misunderstand my post, we're in total agreement. If a situation doesn't warrant it, I'm not about to risk my life or that of another innocent person by taking any type of action. Many people have drowned while trying to save a person from drowning. Fat chance of that out in the middle of the desert though.


No, not a bit... we're cool.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

I really can't draw any line, red or otherwise, in the sand or dirt.

My intent is to protect myself and my wife, and any family member who happens to be in the area.
My tactics include retreat whenever possible, which includes herding the near-and-dear away from any threat, as my first priority.
And my wife is familiar with guns, carries her own, and is a competent shot.

But if a known hoplophobe were being attacked with deadly force, I feel that it would be my moral duty to save that person's life, if it is at all possible.
And "known hoplophobe," if it came to that, would include Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and the entire Washington, DC, Police Department.
(Well, maybe not Michael Bloomberg and "The Wicked Witch of the West.")

Me and the family first.
Then, well, we'll see...


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

In real estate, it's all about location, location, location. 

In armed carry scenarios and saving others, it's all about situation, situation, situation.


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictate tactics, and tactics dictate techniques……techniques should never dictate anything.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

Strictly hypothetically, if I saw that I had a tactical advantage with decent cover, hell yes. If you can save souls from dying by fighting off a bad guy, who cares what the politics are?

GW


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

goldwing said:


> Strictly hypothetically, if I saw that I had a tactical advantage with decent cover, hell yes. If you can save souls from dying by fighting off a bad guy, who cares what the politics are?
> 
> GW


Well politics are one thing, reality may be far different. If one is so unlucky to live in a state where there is a very real possibility that they could be prosecuted for aiding innocent parties, that may very well be the deciding factor. I don't think there are any states that currently far within that purview but I am open to correction with this. I do recall that at one time in California, you were not within your right to use deadly force to protect another person with whom you had no relation or association. I imagine that is no longer the case, but I just don't know.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I really can't draw any line, red or otherwise, in the sand or dirt.
> 
> My intent is to protect myself and my wife, and any family member who happens to be in the area.
> My tactics include retreat whenever possible, which includes herding the near-and-dear away from any threat, as my first priority.
> ...


Not so sure I would be of a mind to offer any help or aid to either of these two. I don't seen either one of them worth putting my life in danger.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Because of legal entanglements and a host of other factors, what at one time seemed to be a no-brainer, that of coming to the aid of those in dire straights, has become an issue that is no longer so cut and dried. Ostracism, law suits, possible jail time or worse... prison, loss of income, irreparable damage to family units, you name it has entered the picture. 

It is no longer so simple and safe to say what you would do, or think you would, in a sudden extreme encounter that subjected others to imminent deadly danger. There are a few exceptions to this but even those might be held up to wary scrutiny and may put the aid giver in social and legal peril. Amazing how we've come to this as a people.

A rather sad commentary on contemporary American life.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

The question was would you jump out of the window to safety or stay ground defend the ones that are unwilling to defend themselves. 

Sure I could think of many scenarios where I defend the old lady in the neighborhood. But in an office scenario? Not even the police is sure anymore (if they are honest) when they can interfere with a criminal and when not. 
That is all not so easy anymore. In today's world is it not so clear anymore who is right and who is wrong. 8 Years of liberalism had turned wrong and right upside down. Do you think you know what is right? Forgethaboutit. No one ever can follow liberal views that is subject to change on a daily base. 

Just imagine a scenario. 2 men breaking 2:00 am in a house stabbing a entire family in their bed to death. In the past it was clear but today? First we have to know what race had broken in and what race is death. Than we have to consider the religion of the people especially the one from the intruder before we rush to a judgement..... You know that and I know that too, at lest who is honest. Wait until the Islam Lady makes it to Madam President, the conservative destroy themselve at the moment and handing the Presidency to her on a silver platter..

Sure I can picture me protecting my old neighbors lady (she is 86 years btw). 
But even if nothing changes at this moment. First you go to jail. Depending on DA and Judge you may cannot make bail and even if so, you may can't afford you mortgage, car payments and so on anymore. 
You loosing over the process your job, your house your car. Your children had to be taken out of school. Do you have a Insurance that pays long therm on a lawyer? You could ruin your and the life of your loved ones with only one pang.
Even when the DA lets you go and don't press charges, than the criminal family sues you because they lost a source of income. No they don't say that this way but that what it is. Can you even imagine what you go trough when this liberal gun hater that you protected said that s/he didn't feel in danger from the attacker? Just think about that and that is for a gun hater liberal very easy to say after the treat is over. 

I mean I would jump out of the window and leave it to the Police to go from there. I am not ashamed about that. You may be call me a jerk but I don't spend that money on a gun, do training attend courses, pay all that money on ammo for training, keep an insurance only to protect myself and than only to commit social-financial suicide when case X happen.

Nothing what I read so far here has the potential to change my mind.
Sorry.


----------



## MoMan (Dec 27, 2010)

SouthernBoy said:


> Because of legal entanglements and a host of other factors, what at one time seemed to be a no-brainer, that of coming to the aid of those in dire straights, has become an issue that is no longer so cut and dried. Ostracism, law suits, possible jail time or worse... prison, loss of income, irreparable damage to family units, you name it has entered the picture.
> 
> It is no longer so simple and safe to say what you would do, or think you would, in a sudden extreme encounter that subjected others to imminent deadly danger. There are a few exceptions to this but even those might be held up to wary scrutiny and may put the aid giver in social and legal peril. Amazing how we've come to this as a people.
> 
> A rather sad commentary on contemporary American life.


Well said SouthernBoy!


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

Touching upon another facet of what S'Boy and PT111 stated , reactions to one defending one's self are nowadays variable by locale. As an example , dusting off an assailant in the city of S.F. ( home of FineSwein) would bring forth a radically different reaction from authorities than in Marfa Texas or Aniak AK. Speaking within a loose general context the reaction would quite likely be worse in a bigger burg than in a smaller town or rural environment , worse on the Left Coast and the Northern Atlantic coast than in the central regions of the country ( i.e from Ariz, Nev,Ida across to W.V. , Kentucky etc.) , certain Northern cities such as Chicago will be much worse than the south........... 

Reactions to firearms , self defense etc. are as polarised by region as anything else in this country , I agree that it has become a very pertinent and quite sad commentary on the state of our modern society.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Freethought said:


> Touching upon another facet of what S'Boy and PT111 stated , reactions to one defending one's self are nowadays variable by locale. As an example , dusting off an assailant in the city of S.F. ( home of FineSwein) would bring forth a radically different reaction from authorities than in Marfa Texas or Aniak AK. Speaking within a loose general context the reaction would quite likely be worse in a bigger burg than in a smaller town or rural environment , worse on the Left Coast and the Northern Atlantic coast than in the central regions of the country ( i.e from Ariz, Nev,Ida across to W.V. , Kentucky etc.) , certain Northern cities such as Chicago will be much worse than the south...........
> 
> Reactions to firearms , self defense etc. are as polarised by region as anything else in this country , I agree that it has become a very pertinent and quite sad commentary on the state of our modern society.


In large part, this is true. Fortunately in my state the law tends to side more with the victim than the perp. But one would be a fool to take this sort of thing for granted regardless of where it may take place. The old adage, anything that can happen... will.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

As we should all know by now, situations can and do quickly spiral out-of-control, and head in directions that you never would have anticipated.

I've seen many instances where good intentions were the basis for action, and ended up being the undoing of many.

In this day and age, people will sue for most anything. I've never been the target of any lawsuit so far. If I have my way, that will not change.

"If you don't take *CONTROL* of the situation, the situation will take *CONTROL *of you!"


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Freethought said:


> Touching upon another facet of what S'Boy and PT111 stated , reactions to one defending one's self are nowadays variable by locale. As an example , dusting off an assailant in the city of S.F. ( home of FineSwein) would bring forth a radically different reaction from authorities than in Marfa Texas or Aniak AK. Speaking within a loose general context the reaction would quite likely be worse in a bigger burg than in a smaller town or rural environment , worse on the Left Coast and the Northern Atlantic coast than in the central regions of the country ( i.e from Ariz, Nev,Ida across to W.V. , Kentucky etc.) , certain Northern cities such as Chicago will be much worse than the south...........
> 
> Reactions to firearms , self defense etc. are as polarised by region as anything else in this country , I agree that it has become a very pertinent and quite sad commentary on the state of our modern society.


I disagree in one thing. 
It is not a modern society. It is a crockett liberal society that means one can do everything and no one is responsible for their own acts. 
That is not modern, that is how ancient societies like Egypt, Greek and Rome disappeared on earth in a NY minute. We teach in our school system again and again the old philosophers change of society. We again teach that insane ancient view points that have destroyed entire Empires, even costing millions and millions innocent lives and than call that insanity modern society. 
That is not modern, it is the prove that people are more stupid than a slice of bread when someone comes and promise them the holy land on earth that everything is for free and no one will be held responsible for any actions as long they are crocket. 
That is not modern, that is highly stupid. No Sir that is not modern. Even in ancient China, the big dynasties vanished under that same old highly theoretical philosophical nonsense. 
Today the children in school have to learn all this nonsense from Socrates and the other ancient Philosopher even have to memorize that nonsense to implement a insane society that suits so little and enslaves the mass. What will you answer to your grandchildrens when they ask you why on earth you looked the other way when they enslaved the people.
I know what my parents and grandparents answered to me when I ask. "How can you just let that socialism in Germany happen. Did you not see what they do"? The answer was always the same. "We didn't know and they even promised us free Healthcare, social money, and even a Volkswagen for free".
No don't say modern because it is everything but modern.


----------



## Freethought (Jan 10, 2016)

PT111Pro said:


> same old highly theoretical philosophical nonsense.
> Today the children in school have to learn all this nonsense from Socrates and the other ancient Philosopher even have to memorize that nonsense to implement a insane society that suits so little and enslaves the mass.


 I would agree with the rest of what you stated , but the above is way , way off base and erroneous. For reference you might wish to start with the method and the WHY of Socrates death. And insofar as it goes he , Plato , Aristotle etc.etc. are the BASE for our modern systems of rational thought , logic , critical thinking , mathematics and the political systems that actually ARE viable.

In point of actual fact the current Socialist trends are diametrically opposed to the opinions and thoughts of the ancient philosophers you decry and are instead a modern development of communist/socialist/Marxist thought traceable back to Lenin , Engels , Marx and others.

While the parallels to the collapse of Rome and other ancient civilisations do exist ( I hear a chorus of Neros fiddling inside the Beltway........don't you?) to lay it at the feet of the philosophies you postulate is much too simplistic and out and out erroneous. If one wishes to go the simple route by way of explanation then look to the same cause that will inevitably make our bloated , hideous juggernaut of a government collapse under it's own vile weight....that being GREED
both at the top and at the bottom among the parasite class that won't work and expects the middle-class to support them , while those in the upper-class deem the middle-class who WILL work to be their servants.

Those same philosophers you blame were a pivotal influence on many of the thinkers who are at the foundation of this nation , men such as John Locke , Thomas Paine , Jefferson , Franklin , John Donne , Monroe , along with those at the foundation of TRUE Libertarianism such as Josiah Warren , Pierre Joseph Proudhon , Thomas Malthus etc....who are at the heart of rightLibertarianism ( as opposed to anarcho-Libertarianism and leftist like Chomsky)........likewise keep in mind the influence of both the Greek philosophers and rightwing Libertarians on current advanced economic thought as developed by Von Mises , Rothbard , Hayek , Milton Friedman and others from the Austrian School of thought , contrast that with Keynesian economics and the tendency in it's applications of ALL the wealth to end up at the top to the benefit of the elite few.

Running out of time presently , we'll delve deep into this later if you wish.


----------



## sdh91 (Dec 12, 2015)

I think it depends how you are wired. A Hypothetical situation is tough to predict one's true reaction. Some are wired to run into the fire, go toward the loud noise. Others are wired to run in the opposite direction. I am not saying either is right or more noble, just a reality of human nature.


----------

