Had To Draw Down This Morning!

[General P.]

How can we in this country be so brazen to fight for and hope to instill freedom elsewhere when we ourselves must resort to argument whether we could defend ourselves against such offensive action as described? Maybe instead of exporting freedom to other countries we should send them our judges and lawyers .
If this guy as described put a hairy paw on me, I would surely shoot him, and again and again...because he kept getting up and after me. I would not sit opposite from him in court, his family maybe but not him, and watch him grin as I get the old shaft. But thankfully I live in a state where I think I would get a fair trial. See... now why would the assailed be concerned with gettng a trial at all.
Good job Alaska. Hope you don't have any more like it.

[Holman]

Wildalaska first let me say that I am glad you are ok, second you did not have to take the next step to defend yourself. The most important thing here is that you live to see another day on top of the dirt. You handled the situation perfectly.

[azredhawk44]

WildAlaska:

Glad you're alright. This board wouldn't be nearly the same without you. Stay safe up there!

AZRedhawkalsoputtingsillyphrasesinhisnameintributetowildalaska'scourageandwisdominthefaceofdanger44

[revjen45]

When I got fined for getting run over by a truck on a dark street with no crosswalk I lost any iota of trust I might have had for the law. Turned out that the law was so obscure that the lawyer I called had to look it up and get back to me. If I need lawyer to cross the street don't expect me to call the police, admit to pulling a gun, and expect anything resembling justice or common sense. I have no obligation to place my own liberty at risk and give my life savings to the legal industry to report the creep to the police so they can harrass him and maybe arrest me. If this sounds cynical that's OK. I don't trust the law or its minions and will avoid contact with them if possible. I don't need or trust the police. I have a 9mm that I do trust and that won't screw me with some obscure piece of arcane malice.

[azurefly]

I hear ya, revjen. Your stated experience (and you didn't even pull a GUN!) is the kind of experience I have read about and vowed to myself to try to avoid having to go through personally. How often is it that a person can learn a lesson from someone else's experience without having to go through that kind of crap himself? When we can take someone else's word for something like this we can relieve ourselves of the pain of getting a first-hand experience.

In other words, I am convinced of the dangers of calling the police (in some situations akin to this one) and I am fortunate that I didn't have to learn the HARD way. Instead, I have READ of OTHERS' experiences and learned what to avoid.


Now, as far as CW04, sir, I didn't say you LIBELED me, so I don't know why you went off on a dictionary-definition tangent. I said that your comments were defamatory. And something need not be legally actionable in order to be defamatory.

Defame: to attack or injure the reputation or honor of by false and malicious statements.

I would infer and argue that attempts to do the same fall under the definition.

You had no reason to state that I condone violent behavior, or would rather let someone else potentially get harmed then make a phone call. You made a real reach with those statements.

I'm not standing here hollering, "Oh, I'm gonna call a lawyer! Bad man! BAD!" But I think you ought to acknowledge the base attempt to put words in my mouth just because I don't agree with your views on the subject.


-azurefly

[CWO4USCGRET]

Infer all you want. You certainly seem to think that your answer is the only answer. If you want to make this personal don't worry, despite the numerous opportunities you have left yourself open for attack, I won't play your silly game; and that is what it is - a silly game.

I only hope that someday you may realize that calling the police to report the erratic, violent behavior of someone is the right thing to do; what would do if you were the victim of the assault after he had been chased off by someone else?

[IZHUMINTER]

CWO:

You certainly seem to think that your answer is the only answer.

I only hope that someday you may realize that calling the police to report the erratic, violent behavior of someone is the right thing to do;

Sir, it is you who appears to be advocating that yours is the only answer. Several folks have attempted to explain that they might not be able to inform the police of such behavior (in sufficient detail for the police to take it seriously) without themselves being deprived of their rights and liberties...and with no guarantee that the police would, in fact, do anything about the potential menace.

Saint Augustine said the pacifism is a mortal sin, as in choosing not to defend your life you are in essence committing suicide. If by informing the police of someone else's odd behavior (not dangerous behavior...not criminal behavior) could cause me to lose the tools I use to defend myself (and my family), then my moral choice is clear. I fully understand that someone else, faced with the same choice, might choose differently. I ask you to understand that as well.

[Lancel]

We seem to have left Wild Alaska's encounter and entered a Legal & Political discussion, so...

If the police will cause me grief and heartache if I defend myself by drawing but not firing.---What will they do to me if I draw and fire?

Maybe someone with those fears and worries shouldn't carry at all; the burden of consequences seems far too heavy.

[CWO4USCGRET]

I considered that, quite a bit when I wrote my responses. A few people have expressed the sentiment that they wouldn't or advised others not to call the police. Several times I have said in my responses that if you are worried about the conseqences of calling the police, then don't tell everything...I suggested that you might even say you saw the confrontation, wanted to report the dangerous behavior, but want to be anonymous about it. What is missing, in my opinion, is people not willing to help other people by doing a civic duty.

That isn't just my opinion; many people would call. I hope if you are backed into a corner and can't defend yourself for some reason, that someone will call 911 for you.

[azurefly]

Originally Posted by CW04

You certainly seem to think that your answer is the only answer...

Even though I said:

Originally Posted by azurefly

I would leave it up to the individual, in his individual circumstances, to have an understanding of whether he is likely to get praise or trouble from the police for having scared a criminal off by using a concealed carry handgun.

and this:

Originally Posted by azurefly

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to the question, "Should WA have called the police," some members' insistence to the contrary notwithstanding.

aaaand this:

Originally Posted by azurefly

Hey, man, I'm not making the decision for you -- don't try to make it for me.

???


-azuresohowopendidireallyleavemyselfanywayfly

[azurefly]

Originally Posted by CW04

Several times I have said in my responses that if you are worried about the conseqences of calling the police, then don't tell everything...

And then I pointed out that the police usually get to the bottom of the story eventually, and when they figure out that you had selectively omitted stuff, they're not likely to view you as a very reliable, honest guy.

We have cops here, right? What do they say about that?


-azurefly

[CWO4USCGRET]

call 911. If you haven't broken the law you don't have a damn thing to worry about...Tell the truth.

[azurefly]

Just moments ago you advocated telling an edited truth, though.

Is that the kind of "truth" you, as a cop, want to be told?

What if YOU got told by a guy that someone had accosted him in a threatening manner, and he just wanted the cops to check the guy out, and then later on as the story unfolded he ended up having to admit to you, "Uh, yeah, and I also, er, um, drew a loaded handgun and pointed it at his face. I must have, um, forgotten to tell you all that"?

You wouldn't start to have reservations about giving credence to further stuff that such a guy might tell you?

Remember, YOU are the one who told us we need not tell the cops we call that a gun was involved at all...

call 911. If you haven't broken the law you don't have a damn thing to worry about...Tell the truth.

Once again, not everyone who hasn't broken the law has nothing to worry about after telling the cops he defended himself with a gun and pointed it at someone's face.


-azurefly

[Lancel]

when they figure out that you had selectively omitted stuff, they're not likely to view you as a very reliable, honest guy.

Examples of how to use common sense when dealing with authority figures:

LEO: Why did the gorilla stop?
Me: (courteously) 'Cause I yelled at him and showed I could fight back.

(An honest but not detailed statement)

LEO: How did you do that?

Me: I don't want to get into all that; I just wanted you to know in case you wanted to keep this guy from hurting himself or others.

OR

Me: I'd prefer not to say, I'm just telling you to be aware of this guy.

OR

Me: Neither one of us was injured. But he could be dangerous. Thought you should know.
..........
The first two answers honestly acknowledge that I have more details.
The last example reframes the question to more important elements since I've already stated that "I showed I could fight back."

Nothing in the above would count against me as a "reliable, honest guy." I'm even honest that I'm holding back.

But most of all if I was really concerned, I'd just do it all anonymously.

Larry

[Lancel]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

attributed to Edmund Burke

[azurefly]

Lancel, you're aware, right, that it's rather difficult to make an anonymous telephone call to the police unless you're using a phone that's not yours, yes?


I find that your recommendations cause me tension. I would be very uneasy giving an evasive story like that, because as I have pointed out (numerous times) the bad guy could end up fingering you as some guy who pointed a gun at him. The bad guy will, of course, say that you did it for no good reason at all. And then it's your word against his after that.

And of course, the police will have a recording of you reporting this guy and making no mention of having drawn and aimed a gun at him.

I am no expert on it, but my intuition tells me that this is a potential recipe for disaster.

I am of the opinion that if you are gonna call the police on the guy, you ought to not try to second-guess what parts of the story you will and won't tell. What if you, when nervous, forget which parts you already told and which you omitted, and then when retelling the story you screw up? It happens. (It's how a lot of criminals get themselves screwed, actually.)

But that's also why I would want to avoid calling the cops in the first place, in some jurisdictions.

I don't know how bad the local cops in West Palm Beach might be about it if I told them I legally drew a gun on someone who was on my property and threatening me. We have the recent "stand-your-ground" law (Oct. '05) to back us up, fortunately. So chances are that here at least, I would not have such strong reservations about telling the cops what had happened.

But I don't blame people in some places, where cops and DAs are demonstrably anti-self-defense and anti-gun.

-azurefly

[Richard Hanson]

I will do my civic duty, that is my duty as a citizen, by exercising my franchise to elect those legislators that will support significant tort reform and who posses a profound respect for each individual's natural rights including the right to self defense. I do not consider it to be my civic duty to hazard my future, and that of my family, in an environment in which the state is often hostile to my rights and where lawyers outnumber physicians, by informing the police in any situation where there exists any doubt as to how my actions might be interpreted by the government or by a jury.

I am grateful for men like Wildalaska who exhibit both the physical courage and the moral character to defend their own liberty and I will not suggest that he erred in not calling the police in a situation where his actions might have been misconstrued. If all men where to act as rigorously and as prudently in their own defense, then I must think our society to be improved and the need for the police to be reduced.

Respectfully,
Richard

[Richard Hanson]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

attributed to Edmund Burke

Lancel,

It is abundantly apparent that a good man, Wildalaska, did in fact act in a very direct manner to defend his own rights. Respectfully, evil can not possible triumph in a nation comprised of such men.

Best Regards,
Richard

[Lancel]

Richard,
This thread stopped being about Wildalaska many posts ago. As I said in earlier posts, Wild did well.

But it's been the longest series of posts I've had for a long time.

The conversation has reached a repetitive dead end if people don't know how to communicate anonymously (public phone is but one way) or don't see how their future and their family is in danger because the other guy couldn't figure it out either.

Time to unsubscribe (but still reachable by PM). It's been interesting. See you all on other threads.

Larry

[azurefly]

That seems like one of those, "These people will never rise to my level of understanding about the subject so I'm leaving" posts.

I think that all that is needed for ignorant posts to proliferate is for good men of understanding to leave the thread in disgust rather than continue to try to get their points across.


Richard, your post was excellent.

By the way, Lancel, the thread stopped being about Wildalaska pretty much after his initial post, since he did not ask a question, request advice, or invite comment. People decided to chime in and extol him or criticize him, but that itself was not "about Wildalaska" either; it was more along the lines that the thread has followed for the subsequent 5 pages.


-azurefly

[chrisandclauida2]

threat of deadly force is ok in all 50 states where physical force is legal. but if you shot him you would probably be in jail or awaiting trial.

a guy in az was just sentenanced to 10 years for an exact situation. only difference was a dog was added to the equasion on the attackers side.

[Capt. Charlie]

This thread stopped being about Wildalaska many posts ago.

And.....

I think that all that is needed for ignorant posts to proliferate is for good men of understanding to leave the thread in disgust rather than continue to try to get their points across.

.....Among numerous others.

Continuing this would only be counterproductive.

With apologies to Wildalaska, that, as they say, is a wrap.