If you carry a gun are you obligated to put your life in danger to stop a shooting?

And the ratio of mass murders to individual murders is? 1 to 100? Lower? Sure, the cavalry will respond when the neighborhood is affluent or a video camera is pointed at them. What about all of those other inconvenient circumstances?

 

Quite different from preventing shootings.

 

A well regulated militia can be tasked with ensuring the domestic tranquility and security of our free States. Only the right insists on the expense of a War on Crime while reducing social spending for the least wealthy.

 

What is the name of the regulated posse your a member of?

 

are you talking about a legal or moral obligation?

 

I don't claim to be as well regulated as Individual Persons should be, who keep and bear Arms.

 

Oh,I see, so all your posts on well regulated militias are just opinions with no expierience to back anything up. OK, good to know.

 

Resorting to the fewest fallacies for my Cause, should be one clue.

 

which is a complete and total strawman, having nothing to do with the debate.

 

If your cause is based on no expierience just feelings how can one be sure of fallacy or truths?

 

yet your entire argument is a fallacy

- - - Updated - - -

yet your entire argument is a fallacy

 

Social obligation - which is possibly the same as a moral one

 

That is why you got an overwhelming amount of no. You made it seem as though you were speaking of legal obligation.
In a situation where I was with my family at a public area and a gunman decides to let loose, I would first make sure my family is safe, and ONLY take a shot if it was clear and no other innocent people were in my line of fire. Yes I would feel morally obligated to protect innocent lives around me.

If you are going to ask a question, make it more specific. Don't ask a very grey question and babble on how it is some kind of proof to your cause because people didn't understand what you meant when they answered this grey question.

 

LOL it doesn't really matter how you answer, BB, like all the anti's she plays twister eh. For example if a CCW citizens arrives at the scene of an active shooter without having seen the activity and doesn't know who the players are and declines to use force instead of blasting away like BB imagines we would, well according to her why carry it. Otherwise if we carry we should blast away. quite a twist eh?

 

Yeah, kinda like Biden sayin shoot through a door with a shotgun eh?

 

Yup ya just gotta wonder

 

We/you cannot expect an individual to understand the moral precept of self defense or defense of others when their own philosophical code denies the precept exists.

 

Moral and social should be different,

I Hold women to a higher standard, (Personally) Society says they are the same.
I own a F-150 w a V8 (331) as being the best vehicle for me (morally, I could not NOT own a truck)
Society says I should own a Prius o.0
I choose to defend myself w anything possible (Be it a knife in my pocket, to gun in a holster)
Society says I should lay down and die.

 

Now morally and social obligations.

Social obligation apparently is to have given this lady CPR.
BUT The child agrees (to a point I see)
http://www.ems1.com/communications-...urse-refuses-to-perform-CPR-on-elderly-woman/

So a Lady 87-year-old Lorraine Bayless collapsed a nurse refused to give CPR.
Did NOT have a Do not recesitate order, BUT Policy says ALL they can do is call 911.

Now I See it this way..
If she would of Given CPR and the patient still died, She would be critizised for not doing it well
She did nothing and is being critizised for it now.
If the patient had lived but injured in some way she would still receive critisizm.

Should her "Social" obligation have overridden her legal and possibly moral obligation?

 

Suppressing Insurrections of Individuals of the People is one reason why the militia of the United States shall not be infringed in their Individual right to keep and bear of Arms.

 

dude, give it a rest. You've already been outed in three other currently running threads....................
Read the thread op..it has nothing to do with the Right of keep,possess,hold, own...........it is about moral or ethical obligation. Don't start your (*)(*)(*)(*) on this one. You are not only out of order, you are posting off topic...............

 

stjames, you've never owned a parrot or been divorced have you?

 

Sorry but you are confusing tabloid discussion with societal mores (pronounces more-ays)

Societal more for America would be to own a Hummer and !@#@! the tabloids

The societal expectations that form societal obligation are found not in media but in peer pressure

 

And twenty years ago she would have had NO obligation because CPR does not "save" a life, anyone who has seen the survival statistics knows that. The best it does is maybe, maybe give a second chance

 

So maybe I am not understanding this. So society does not consist of my peers? (Peer Pressure)
So society is telling me to buy smaller vehicles for the enviorment, Peers are telling me to own a car, And I choose to own a truck because neither of them h as my best interest, Do I still have obligation to own either?

No I see it maybe simpler then you do.

Moral (What I feel is right)
society (What you feel is right)
Legal (What the books say is right)
am I mistaken for thinking this? Society (Everyone else's opinion) Dosnt matter to me when I do certain things, Sometimes it does, But thats usually when I need to do something and I know someones done it already.
Legal, Matters if its something "Dangerous" or possibly a crime.

Drifting, For instance is morally for me something thats not right but I CAN do. Legally I shouldnt and society deems it wronge.

Guns, I own one and morally feel if someone comes to harm my family I will put them in the dirt, Legally I am allowed to and socially (Half of you will agree, half of you wont) The half that agree's would protect my family as well the other half that wouldnt still hold no merrit to me as the half that would. For the fact that if something happens and they are not there, THEY cannot do anything about it, If I am there I can do something or if someone I know is there They can get my gun and protect themselves. Correct?