Pax started this thread
And I have to admit I was shocked, not by the scenario/event but by the approach many people believe they would take in such an event.
Seemed to me that many in that thread were treating it like a game. Where if you do something that *might* get you into legal dificulty you lost. While if you avoided legal problems but your SO was killed or died due to lack of action that was a win.
When I say legal trouble I am NOT talking about breaking the law. If you ever use a gun or other weapon you will probably have some legal headaches even if you do everything legally. That is life.
I am just wondering how others set their "mission goals" [for lack of a better term] for self defense? Or in other words what are they trying to do with their self defense mindset? Just survive? Protect others, or just protect certain others? What you expect to do in a self defense situation will certainly affect tactics.
In one scenario from The Red Zone http://www.recguns.com/TRZ.html
there was a lot of discussion about something similar to this. Some people argue that when a person has a CCW they have a higher moral/ethical obligation than sheeple do. I don't think that is a very strong arguement.
Most discussion about CCW, defensive use of weapons, etc has been mainly focused on the well being of the indivual with the CCW, while ignoring the tactics, legal issues, moral & emotional issues involved with acting in defense of someone else. Does that focus make sense?