|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
View Poll Results: How much risk to others is acceptable? | |||
My life and the lives of those I love are more important to me than the lives of strangers [shoot] | 42 | 85.71% | |
It would be immoral to risk the lives of others to save myself or those I love [don't shoot] | 7 | 14.29% | |
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 29, 2010, 12:13 PM | #51 | |
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
Quote:
This thread isnt about guns or physically training qua training to use a gun.... Its about a mindset. Not to use that term like the ramboninja trainers use it, but to make one think about the basic question: How far are you willing to go to protect yourself and/or your lived ones? It goes beyond the fantasies of confronting street punks. WildwouldyoulaydownyourownlifeforyourfellowmanAlaska ™ |
|
July 29, 2010, 12:55 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 16, 2010
Posts: 1,654
|
Wildalaska's scenario's are extravagant and unlikely but he makes a very good point. The "fantasies" I call training ( about cronfronting street thugs as Wild said) are good to think about, but most likely in real life its going to be MUCH different. Whatever your preconceptions were of how it would go down will most likely be completley off. Expect the unexpected is the message I am getting from him and I think it's a good one.
|
July 29, 2010, 01:16 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2002
Location: northern CA for a little while longer
Posts: 1,930
|
Quote:
If we're judged by the words we use, some folks might be surprised (or not) if they found that others formed certain impressions about their potential willingness to use violence at the expense of other innocent persons. Now, perhaps this isn't exclusively how things will actually develop in a civil trial setting, since more than 90% of our communication is non-verbal (meaning body language, betraying micro-expressions and other physical indicators of thought and state of mind, etc). People will often create judgments about others based upon non-verbal communication without even realizing it. Language and commentary used in public online forums, such as this one, for example, can be located and subpoenaed to try and create a way to impeach statements made elsewhere, such as in court, when under oath, or just to create an impression that might be seen as being more favorable to the plaintiff's side of a civil case and perhaps used for advantage by the plaintiff in such a proceeding. I am NOT an attorney, however, and don't try to pretend to be able to offer legal advice. Not at all. Having testified in court my fair share of times for my LE career, having testified in federal court as a witness in a civil rights trial and having known many attorneys who practiced law for civil matters, I learned it's prudent to avoid making glib comments or saying things without thinking about them first. Words mean things. Our bodies speak volumes without our awareness when it comes to non-verbal communication, too. There are an increasing number of outstanding, and very interesting, classes being given to our LE community on interrogation techniques and non-verbal communication. A lot of cops become qualified as expert witnesses in local courts during their careers. Some of them decide to go to work as PI's upon retirement to supplement their incomes. Some of them don't mind taking money to use their talents and experience for plaintiff's attorneys. I've known some of them. A word to the wise is sometimes not needed. A word to the unwise is sometimes not heeded. The 5 words nobody ever wants to hear? "Will the defendant please rise." Just my thoughts, folks.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer |
|
July 29, 2010, 02:03 PM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
As a psychologist out here, who has read the jury simulation literature and relevant legal literature - ranting about "dead" will make a poor impression on the jury if your shoot is ambiguous.
As we said before, the jury probably won't have gun choir folk on it. Just regular old folk and when they see innocent Grandma on the ground and you have to explain the extra hole from the stray round - making sure a guy already shot is dead - won't fly. You need to survive the trial also. So keeping your big yap shut is part of that.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
July 29, 2010, 02:08 PM | #55 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
||
July 29, 2010, 02:20 PM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Quote:
All, once again, thank you for offering your insights to this discussion, it is very much appreciated. VR Matt Last edited by .22lr; July 29, 2010 at 02:29 PM. Reason: too lazy to properly proof read the first time. |
|
July 29, 2010, 02:25 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 16, 2010
Posts: 1,654
|
Yes I also agree with you. Not every problem can be solved with a firearm and the use of one should be avoided until absolutley necessary.
|
July 29, 2010, 02:30 PM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Quote:
But I'm sure you've noticed that many people who post here don't believe that deadly force is always the absolute last resort. The discussions you've started on this topic are a useful antidote to that way of thinking, and I thank you for that.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
|
July 29, 2010, 05:02 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
Psshawwww I've seen this movie before! Shoot the hostage! It worked in Speed!
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
July 29, 2010, 05:47 PM | #60 |
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
|
Spiff has spoken!
WildhedoesntsaymuchbutwhenhedoesAlaska ™ |
July 29, 2010, 07:52 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Not hijack an excellent serious discussion but when praticing hostage rescue shots or in matches, when the no-shoot is a spouse, sometimes inappropriate humor bubbles to the surface.
I always thought a great episode of Law and Order would be when the spouse of some competition master was taken hostage and the other spouse fires two rounds and one does in the spouse. Jack McCoy (notoriously antigun DA) would try to prove that they were having difficulties and with the spouse's expertise the no-shoot hit was on purpose. Older folk with a few marriages under their belts find this possible.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
July 30, 2010, 03:06 AM | #62 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 2,199
|
Quote:
Under the scenario presented, I would not fire. I would note, as I tried to in my previous post, that not being able to safely fire does not preclude further resistance in many cases. Of course, in cases where lethal force is justified, a firearm is often the most effective weapon. Trying to stop a lethal attacker with an improvised weapon isn't a fun prospect, but it is better than shooting an innocent in the process. (My opinion.) Would I react the way I voted, under this scenario, in real life? I hope I never have to find out! Stress can do strange things. |
|||
July 30, 2010, 09:19 AM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 28, 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 705
|
Quote:
"Many things have already gone terribly wrong" could be true but may have occurred years before the scenario. The upbringing of the bad guy can make him into a creature that only understands fear and violence. Most good people don’t like to even consider the existence of these people, and if forced to recognize them, choose to focus on whatever thread of potential they might have for redemption. While the potential for one of these people to turn their life around is precious, it cannot have measurable value in a time-limited scenario because in the present time, it is not yet real. On your entry to the scene, force may be the correct and first option to solve the immediate problem. Taking WildAlaska’s "shoot into the schoolchildren" option would be no different than running away in a sense, though the immediate result would be more devastating. You would be relinquishing control to the bad guy rather than working towards gaining control. If you shoot the kids, he still has your wife at knifepoint. Shooting them would be illogical because there is no gain and the bad guy cannot be trusted to honor any "deal". In both cases, there is no value in imaginary gain after the scenario ends. When you are "in the moment" the future is irrelevant except for your goals.
__________________
Keep smiling ... it'll just make 'em wonder what you're up to... |
|
July 30, 2010, 09:57 AM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2007
Location: Lago Vista TX
Posts: 2,425
|
Been mulling this over for a while, and I still don't have what I would call a satisfactory decision ... there are a lot of much smarter people on this forum than I, and it seems the conclusions they reach are all over the map.
However ... in the case where an innocent MIGHT be injured but my wife WOULD be killed, I'd have to take the shot if I had no other way to solve the problem ... I'm not sure life would be worth living if an innocent died so I or my wife could live ... but as many have said before, your decision if faced with that awful scenario won't be made after hours of contemplation; it will have to be made in a split second ... that's why I love these kinds of questions; they give you a chance to find out where you stand on moral issues and issues of life and death ... practice those head shots! In Wild's school children scenario, I would NOT shoot the kids, no matter the outcome ... I think I'd rather be dead and I know my wife would; assuming you somehow escaped imprisonment, how could you look at each other every day and remember you're alive because you killed a child at a pyscho's bidding? that way lies suicide down the road ... I'm going to stay in the house and have my groceries delivered; too dangerous out there ...
__________________
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants." Albert Camus |
July 30, 2010, 02:33 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2007
Posts: 245
|
continuation with a shift in focus
All,
I'd like to continue this discussion while adding a new thread "Are you responsible [Part 2b]" which will explore a different aspect of risk / responsibility as it relates to self defense. Thank you, ~Matt Last edited by .22lr; July 30, 2010 at 02:34 PM. Reason: stinking typos... that I accept both moral and finanacial responsibility for... |
July 30, 2010, 03:01 PM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Quote:
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
|
Tags |
innocent , responsible , risk , training |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|