View Single Post
Old August 13, 2017, 10:43 AM   #95
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,729
And... so you're saying that believing that the risk to health or life of a defenceless individual is not enough for someone to intervene in that attack?

If so, why is this thread even open?

That, taken alone, would not begin to justify the use of deafly force by anyone there.
Deadly force is not the only method of intervening: another poster recounted hold thieves at gun point until the police arrived. Deadly force was not applied nor needed, even if a gun was used.

A gun is not a katana. It is not obliged to draw blood for honour to be met.

We all recognise that, those of us that are firearms carriers, drawing a weapon may be enough to end the threat.
Isn't ending the threat the object here rather than using deadly force?

Are we saying that drawing a weapon and bellowing "stop kicking that man in the head and step away immediately or I'll fire!!" is not an option?!
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; August 13, 2017 at 10:56 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Page generated in 0.03896 seconds with 8 queries