The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old February 24, 2013, 02:44 PM   #51
Boomer58cal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2013
Location: closer than you think
Posts: 967
"Run toward the gun fire" "Close and engage" Nutnfancy look him up on you tube and join the TNP'ers!!!
Boomer58cal is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 02:54 PM   #52
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 4,026
Let's keep it civil, guys. Flames will be extinguished, along with the rest of the thread.
__________________
"Once the writer in every individual comes to life (and that time is not far off), we are in for an age of universal deafness and lack of understanding."
(Milan Kundera, Book of Laughter and Forgetting, 1980)
Vanya is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 02:55 PM   #53
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,215
I'd rather call myself a "good Samaritan" if I have to call myself anything at all; in part because I don't want to associate with a lot of the people who call themselves "first responders" -- just like they don't want to associate with me.

Whoever is at fault for this "us vs. them" animosity, it is real.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is online now  
Old February 24, 2013, 03:11 PM   #54
Father Time
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2007
Posts: 632
Quote:
Whoever is at fault for this "us vs. them" animosity, it is real.
I disagree...
Father Time is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 03:11 PM   #55
Rob228
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2010
Location: Broomfield CO
Posts: 590
Quote:
Was he lecturing you, or telling you something *true* that you didn't like?
That is a very good point, and it just been left at that you would be fully correct, he would have been mostly right and it is something that I would not have wanted to hear. His overall point was that he believed protection was up to the police, even after pointing out a (his words) dismal response time.

It might bear on the conversation that we both went to HS in New York, I managed to escape that state twelve years ago and have not looked back. The whole conversation was started when it appeared as if retired LEO's were going to be exempt from all of the NYS firearms nonsense that was recently passed. I mentioned to him that I did not see it as being appropriate that only LEO's and retired LEO's were going to be allowed to defend themselves. Granted, I could have phrased it far more tactfully, but I didn't.

Last edited by Rob228; February 24, 2013 at 03:16 PM.
Rob228 is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 03:17 PM   #56
TheGoldenState
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2010
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
Quote:
Whoever is at fault for this "us vs. them" animosity, it is real.
I disagree...
As do I.
__________________
The Day You Get Comfortable Is The Day You Get Careless...
TheGoldenState is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 03:36 PM   #57
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,675
While I firmly believe that he who controls the terminology controls the debate, I cannot agree with all of us calling ourselves first responders. In fact, I am pretty certain that in my state the term "first responder" is defined in state statute, and for me to call myself that when I am not a police officer, fireman, or EMT/paramedic would be illegal.

Statutes notwithstanding, IMHO the term "first responder" in general parlance already has an established meaning, and if we try to assume the mantle already worn by those who fit the accepted categories of first responder will only make us look like idiots (at best), or deliberate imposters (at worst).
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 03:47 PM   #58
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
^^^

Then suggest an easy to understand alternative that will ring well and be immediately acceptable to the common soccer-mom.

I have no intellectual investment into any one phrase or statement. I am interested in what works, and what will cause our efforts to be received in a more responsive way by the great mass of undecided people. If the mainstream media can use talking points and sound bites... so can we.

To a few above posts, my views on the dismal state of urban policing (A) has nothing to do with this, is (B) an observation that many make, and (C) takes away nothing from my cordial relationship with many of my friends who are local LEO's. To a man, they all support CCW.


We are all in this together. Let's make it work.


Willie


.

Last edited by Willie Sutton; February 24, 2013 at 03:53 PM.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 04:39 PM   #59
TheGoldenState
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2010
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
I have no intellectual investment into any one phrase or statement. I am interested in what works, and what will cause our efforts to be received in a more responsive way by the great mass of undecided people.

I must be ignorantly blissful in that I am not aware of a general mass who is conflicted on the verbiage and necessity to define and distinguish, beyond already socially (and legally) accepted terms, for first-responders, good samaritans, and CCW wannabe heroes.

If you're not a cop, and you want to be a well-do-good citizen than be all the things that encompass a GOOD SAMARITAN (ie: observe, report, and take action-within reason based on situation, training, urgency, etc.-).
__________________
The Day You Get Comfortable Is The Day You Get Careless...
TheGoldenState is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 04:51 PM   #60
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willie Sutton
Then suggest an easy to understand alternative that will ring well and be immediately acceptable to the common soccer-mom.
I don't know of one and I can't think of one. The anti-gun Suzie Soccer-moms already have their minds made up, so I don't think calling myself something I'm not is likely to change their minds.

I actually sort of lean toward "free citizen" ... except I'm not really that, either (although it is what I aspire to be).

Frankly, I'm not interested in convincing the Suzie Soccer-moms of the world. The only people I'm concerned about are the people who write the laws. For them, I explain that I am Vietnam veteran, a taxpayer, a constituent, and a direct descendant of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, and that I do not appreciate their promulgating laws that are in direct contravention of the Constitution. I also take every opportunity to remind them that they took an oath to uphold and to defend that Constitution. (Not that it does any good -- they ALL preface every anti-2A proposal with, "We can respect the Second Amendment and still make it so nobody can have guns." I haven't figured out yet how that works.)
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 05:10 PM   #61
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
Frankly, I'm not interested in convincing the Suzie Soccer-moms of the world.


Sadly, they are the ones who swing the vote, and who we most desperately need to reach.

They do not respond well to terms like "Free Citizen", "Patriot", or any of the other catch-phrases that we all use as a code to represent our value system. "We" understand the code. To "them" the terms are scary... and after all aren't black guns scary too?

We ignore these neighbors of ours at our peril.


Willie


.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 05:14 PM   #62
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,157
I don't like the term "first responder". It is confusing. Perhaps "Emergency Responder" would be a better term, but for now it is what it is. There is a difference between being the first person to arrive at the scene of an emergency, and being a certified first responder. I'm part of a local volunteer search and rescue team. We also respond to natural and man made disasters and most of our folks are certified as first responders. I start the 3 month class next week and will be certified in May.

Even at that there are different levels of first responder training. The class below is actually the entry level course to becoming a certified EMT. Most firemen and many in LE have completed the entire EMT course which goes much farther.

http://www.nremt.org/nremt/about/reg_1st_history.asp
jmr40 is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 06:46 PM   #63
1-DAB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 5, 2010
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 157
haven't read the whole thread, but my concealed carry permit is for me. just me, and my wife if we are together.

i have no duty to anyone else, nor do i have any kind of immunity like the police do. if i have to hire a lawyer, i'm paying for that, not the taxpayer.

my best bet is to avoid and get out of a conflict, not add bullets to it.
1-DAB is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 07:14 PM   #64
hardworker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 4, 2010
Posts: 820
Yeah, we are not first responders. It is not our job to fight crime. I don't know how people envision a defensive scenario, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't end with a slap on the back and an invitation to join some secret society of crime fighters. We're being singled out in part because we single ourselves out. When you make it a point to correct someone on minutia of definitions (mags vs clips, assault weapons vs "sporting rifles") you're hurting everyone.

By calling ourselves first responders, we're taking a step toward mall ninja territory. Believe it or not, non-gun owners aren't stupid. They know BS when they hear it. If I walk around talking about how I'm actually the first line of defense against a shooting, they'll think I'm an idiot, much like I would anyone who said such nonsense. A lot of people think we're all mall ninjas, no need to reinforce the stereotype.

Let them call whatever they want an assault rifle, as long as they know what it is they're referring to. As long as they know that it means semi-auto with other features, I don't care what they call it.
hardworker is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 07:42 PM   #65
Venom1956
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 3,106
Quote:
"Run toward the gun fire" "Close and engage" Nutnfancy look him up on you tube and join the TNP'ers!!!
Ugh... Yeah and get a free ride to jail! Nutnfancy is the LAST person I'd take advice from EVER. Musta got in alotta gun fights on those planes he flew...

If I was in some sort of situation I'd just tell em the advice my dad gave me.

"Do what is right and then do it the best you can. That's all you can ask of someone."
__________________
E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that.
I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph.
Venom1956 is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 08:29 PM   #66
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willie Sutton
Frankly, I'm not interested in convincing the Suzie Soccer-moms of the world.


Sadly, they are the ones who swing the vote, and who we most desperately need to reach.
I agree we need to reach and try to win these folks over, both, "Suzie Soccer-moms" and also those folks who "never owned a firearm and are hence scared of them." We may disagree on the methods to do this though.

Yesterday I went to a consignment sale...Nothing huge, maybe 100 people and a lot of various stuff being sold off. There was one person there open carrying a handgun. Nothing huge, right? There were a few people I knew that asked me "is it legal?" with similar questions in a whispered tone, and I spent some time trying explain the open carry... After I left I stopped by my Aunt and Uncles on the way home, and there was Joe Biden on TV again talking about his thoughts on a shotgun. I spent the visit with my Aunt and Uncle then talking about firearms, the legal issues etc. What I am getting at is, there are some people who will only tolerate some things (firearms) to a certain level, such as hunting or home defense, etc. I spent several hours yesterday trying to help "normalize" firearm ownership with several people. What I learned from it was that there are some folks who are good to a certain level, and that's fine. What we need to do (my thoughts) is to encourage that more, and not keep pushing for "if you don't want all of this, your against us" when dealing with those on the fence. Give the right information, be helpful and try to encourage them to explore a bit more, but stop before their eyes glaze over, cause then they are lost.

Some terms like "patriot", while proper when speaking about someone supporting the constitution. Others, such as "Free Citizen" tend to denote such folks as the sovereign citizen movement, which is a good bit distant from the RKBA movement.

Why not just use the common terms we already have, such as a ccw holder/permitee, or a concerned firearm owner? These are honest and direct, but also (at least to me) show a honesty, and if needed a helpfulness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hardworker
By calling ourselves first responders, we're taking a step toward mall ninja territory. Believe it or not, non-gun owners aren't stupid. They know BS when they hear it. If I walk around talking about how I'm actually the first line of defense against a shooting, they'll think I'm an idiot, much like I would anyone who said such nonsense.
You hit a nail on its head for me with your comment, hardworker.... There are a few folks I have encountered that talk about how they are there to protect everyone else since they have a ccw. I tend to think not only is it nonsense for them to go around and talk all the stuff, but its also pushing a lot of those who keep a firearm for self defense at home away from supporting easing restrictions. Some of them I always wonder if they left home without there cape, and the "S" for their chest.

People like to point out how "when seconds count police are only minutes away" but if its pushed that the ccw holders are out to save the public at large (not arguing either side of that debate), then your going to give cause to creating similar phrases, either true or not for ccw holders. Perhaps I should register the phrase "I carry pepper spray because a ccw holder is too heavy, and besides it goes good on saltines." I'm joking, but also a bit serious too when it comes down to how some few opinionated ccw holders feel they are there to protect everyone.

Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; February 24, 2013 at 09:01 PM.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 09:00 PM   #67
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
^^ thoughtful and contemplative, as is usual from you.

My OP was designed to encourage conversation, and one of the ways we encourage conversation is to encourage healthy dissent. I certainly did not expect everyine to agree, and in fact felt the opposite. I did expect some creativity to be expressed, and figured that someone else would come up with something better. I am distressed with the lack thereof. It goes thought to something that I am proud of, and that's the fact that we, as a group, tends towards intellectual honesty in what we do and say. We have a hard time "using words" that are other than pedantically correct. It's a blessing... and a terrible flaw as we try to deal with a group that has no respect whatsoever for accuracy in language.

You strike the nail squarely when you say that many people will put up with firearms to a certain point but no further. I'm trying to calculate a way to leverage that point a little further towards us... just incrementally.

Language is one of the ways that we do this. Contemplation in advance of how to have the discussion is an important thing to do.


Willie


.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 09:06 PM   #68
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 717
thanks for the compliment Willie.

I don't disagree with always trying to increase what is "normal" and brainstorming, if you will. Im going to think more on trying to figure out some term, though I am unsure what it could be. Also, thanks for starting the conversation.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 09:39 PM   #69
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,215
Quote:
Some terms like "patriot", while proper when speaking about someone supporting the constitution. Others, such as "Free Citizen" tend to denote such folks as the sovereign citizen movement, which is a good bit distant from the RKBA movement.

Why not just use the common terms we already have, such as a ccw holder/permitee, or a concerned firearm owner? These are honest and direct, but also (at least to me) show a honesty, and if needed a helpfulness.
At least it's better than calling ourselves "sheepdogs", which was all the rage just a year or two ago.

Did someone delete my picture of Sam Sheepdog (and Ralph), posted a couple of hours ago? Maybe its point was too subtle.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is online now  
Old February 24, 2013, 11:05 PM   #70
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willie Sutton
You strike the nail squarely when you say that many people will put up with firearms to a certain point but no further. I'm trying to calculate a way to leverage that point a little further towards us... just incrementally.
One way to do this, of course, is to practice open carry (where legal). The Suzie Soccer-moms of the world often have a preconceived idea that only gang-bangers carry guns. Yet they don't even blink if they see a uniformed police officer (or security company armed guard) wearing a gun on a duty belt. They might blink -- once -- if they see a detective, but if he/she has a badge on the belt next to the gun, Suzie relaxes immediately.

My view is that if more of us would carry openly when dressed neatly (let's say in "executive casual") so the Suzies of the world could be exposed to decent, ordinary people wearing guns and not making any big deal about it -- it could go a long way toward what the psychologists call "desensitizing" them.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 24, 2013, 11:42 PM   #71
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by zxcvbob
At least it's better than calling ourselves "sheepdogs", which was all the rage just a year or two ago
I do agree. Similar with the term "sheepeople"... If we want to get more people to the table we need to work toward reaching everyone we can.

Also, while I am on the topic of reaching everyone we can, lets stop it with the "us vs them"... As I already mentioned in another thread, many in law enforcement (rank and file) are very supportive of the RKBA. Its disingenuous.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 12:00 AM   #72
pilot141
Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2013
Location: Way south Tejas
Posts: 21
Willie, thank you for starting this thread because I think is a discussion that needs to happen.

As we argue amongst ourselves about the best way to present a legal, safe, protected position, we get bogged down on terms.

The gun control folks have no hang-ups on terms or rules for the debate. They may be lawless and beyond control, but we should not stoop to their level.

I don't actually have a solution - i just want to see something of a consensus show up among us that we can all use. A united front is a strong front - I think that is what were going for with the First Responder thing. I personally agree with you that it would be an effective effort, but enough people have chimed in that are in the trenches that I now think that we might need something different.

What that is, I don't know. Sorry, I suck.
pilot141 is offline  
Old February 26, 2013, 04:30 PM   #73
southjk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2012
Location: Memphis
Posts: 429
I think most people do and will equate "first responder" as a police/fire/medical professional and rightly so in my opinion. And that should not be applied to someone just because he is a carry permit holder.

If you want something different how about "volunteer responder"?
southjk is offline  
Old February 26, 2013, 10:44 PM   #74
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 982
Being a "regular guy" with no military or tactical training I'm a bit concerned about the idea (that may or may not be strongly held here) that concealed carry licensees are somehow expected to charge in like the Calvary and defend the population against mass murderers.

I carry a PDW, (personal defense weapon) not a rifle. It has limited range and ammunition.

I neither want to be a victim nor be hailed a hero. To try to engage in combat with a determined shooter with inadequate firepower could be lethal.

I fail to see how all this talk about having armed civilian(s) engaging in firefights with shooters (amid throngs of other unarmed panicked civilians) profits the pro-gun movement?

The media labels us as a bunch of loons just itching to draw our weapons.

This idea of armed civilians jumping into the fray with guns ablazing I think just gives the other side more ammunition to shoot at us.
dajowi is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 01:32 AM   #75
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,270
Most CCW holders are not out to save other people. They are carrying to protect themselves and family. They are not carrying to kill a bad guy. They are carrying to diffuse a situation and taught to use the opening provided by the weapon to move out of the situation if at all possible. First responders can be held liable if they don't act when they see a tragedy. Is that what you're equating CCW holders to? You mean to say that everybody that has a concealed firearm has a legal responsibility to move towards the enemy and engage with the idea of disabling? That we are carrying for the protection of our fellow citizens like a guard?

If that's how you carry, fine. Nothing wrong with that. But saying it like this insinuates that everybody carries with these goals in mind. If I had a gun and a clear shot at a violent offender where I could save somebody's life. When the time comes for me to get a CCL, I'll do so and remain aware and yes, will try to affect a positive influence on the life of others. But I will not be one who charges towards the gunfire. Maybe I will because you can't say what you'll do until crisis happens. But that will not be my mindset going in and this term would insinuate that.
dakota.potts is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13908 seconds with 7 queries