Well I put this in the "What would you do thread" But have been mulling it over (and it wont let me delette the post over there) I know when guns are talked about (Trying to keep it away from guns more then a what would you do personally type of thread) Just guns happen to be involved in a lot of SD scenarios. I want both sides of the fence so in some of these I will ask what if there was a gun in play (and I might throw out type as well) So this is What I posted 1st part: If this happened to YOU (whomever you may be) What would you do? 2nd part: If this happened to your mom/sister What would you do? 3rd part: If this happened to someone near you, you saw or heard a comotion would you do anything?
What I'd do depends.... Is this person tougher than me? Does he have friends nearby? Am I in a hostile place, with shabby law enforcement? I avoid physical confrontations, so no one has tried to lay a hand on me in 25 years. If they just threatned me or a loved one, I would fight back unless the guy was very dangerous. Calling 9-1-1 would be a good option. If the guy was too dangerous, I move myself and or loved ones to the car. Put my handgun in my belt. Take some pictures of the guy and wait for the police (or leave). If the guy was so foolish as still come at me. He would be warned, then shot.
First I would like to appolagize for how long it took to reply. sincerely appolagize. My comments are in Red I would also like to thank you for replying since I have seen about 30 views with not one person willing to reply. In a bit I will change the scenario maybe get more people to participate. Again I appalogize it took long to reply and would like to thank you Spade115
A lot of people like to say "if that was me, I would have" but in the heat of the moment, you don't react the way you would like to think. With that being said, and me being naturally aggressive towards people like this manager, If it was me, and I was a cancer patient therefor more than likely weak and unable to physically defend myself without my concealed carry, I would put my hand on my gun, and warn them I have a gun, and let them see I am not lying. She was right ontop of her and pulling a gun could have resulted poorly, but it may stop that faster and made that (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) not feel so high and mighty. Right after I would call the police and tell them exactly what happened so she would not have been able to twist the story and say I pulled a gun and threatened her. Second, if that happened to my mother, and I was there I would have walked right into that womens room and yanked that (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) off of her myself. If I wasn't there, I would have gone back there afterwards and been tearing some new (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s about it and making sure to say as loud as I could that this person accosted my cancer surviving mother in this very bathroom. In the above instances, heavy lawsuits would have been to follow from my end. Third, if it was someone else and I was there, I still would have gone into that bathroom and stood up for that person. My late father instilled into me to stand up for the helpless. What it comes down to, even if it was a homeless person, that manager had no right to do that. Sorry about the novel of a response, but I feel passionate about preventing people from becoming victims.
Hang on... A person was embarrased and treated in an inexcusable manner by both an individual and a business. The fact that this is showing up in a 'gun control' forum implies that escalating the situation by using (or threatening to use) lethal force is somehow a rational option. What level of poor behavior warrants threatening (or actually committing to) the use of lethal force? What if someone cuts you off in traffic? What if your neighbor is having a loud party late at night? What if there's someone walking down the street in your neighborhood and you don't like the look of them? Part of the reason gun control is being discussed is because people are not making responsible decisions regarding the use/storage of their weapons. Have you seen how much damage can be done to a business with Youtube videos and memes? THAT would be a more appropriate reaction than going all "Dirty Harry" on some random Taco Bell manager with a severe attitude problem.
The reason I put it here was for the reason that I wanted those who think everyone who is a "gun toting person" who wants to shoot it out with everyone can see the people they condemn can also deal with problems without "a gunfight" not everyone is a "Rambo" as a lot of anti gun people on here seem to think of gun owners. Not all problems need to be a shoot out but you also have to see even a innocent encounter of going to clean your bag might get you attacked. Not everyone is a "sweet and innocent person"
I personally feel there are very few "sweet and innocent" people... It just seems that they're as likely to get shot as anyone else, which sucks. That being said, I think there is a LOT of grey area between "sweet and innocent" and "deserves application of lethal force", and that people need to avoid utilizing their firearms unless dealing exclusively with the latter.
No one is advocating this type of vigilante justice, and if they are, I don't think they are realizing what they are doing. As far as CCW holders in shall issue states, there are very few cases of the types of behavior you are referring to. No one goes around shooting at people in traffic related incidents, loud parties at night, or killing people walking down the street. Blood doesn't run in the street, but there has been a noticeable down tick in violent crimes in urban areas where shall issue laws are in place vs before the area had shall issue laws. Crime does go up, but it is mostly property crime that is non-violent in nature, at least here in my area. If you will bring up the Martin/Zimmerman case, it has yet to be settled, but realize that the police originally designated that case as a self defense shooting until a month after the incident, the media got involved and Obama said "he would look like my kid" and then (*)(*)(*)(*) went off the deep end for George Zimmerman. With the state withholding evidence in discovery from the defense, it is looking more and more like the case will get thrown out. Treyvon wasn't an innocent little kid, but I am not excusing George Zimmermans actions either. The case will be settled and will set precedent for future cases in that jurisdiction. As for using lethal force, there needs to be four elements for it to be a good shoot. 1. Ability - the person that has the potential to get shot must have the ability to cause great harm. This could be because of a weapon like a gun or knife, physical size compared to the other person (MMA fighter vs grandma), or even something as simple as a rock. 2. Opportunity - the person that has the potential to get shot must have the opportunity to do the shooter harm. This means that the shooter has to be within a certain distance of the perpetrator. If the perp is holding a long range rifle, this could mean 400+ yards. If the person is holding a knife, 20-30 feet at a minimum in my opinion. If it is a hand gun, reasonably, 100 yards for a man size target. 3. Intent - the perp must show intent to the shooter for there to be intent. This could mean a guy 15 feet away saying "I am going to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stab you!", a man holding a pistol at 20 yards saying "I want your money or your dead!", or a man acting erratically in the middle of the street shooting in random directions. This does not include someone whittling on a park bench next to you with a pen knife while minding his own business. 4. Jeopardy - The overall totality of the evidence must give the shooter a sense of Jeopardy that if the shooter does nothing, they have a reasonable fear of their life. A man handcuffed to a police bench saying "I am going to kill you!" meets some of the elements of a good shoot, but not all. A large man holding a knife in your house 20 feet away and noticing you for the first time meets all the requirements for a good shoot. The same may be said for the exact same man with the same weapon in the street, but depends on what happens at that point. If he says "don't shoot!" drops his knife, and then runs away, you don't meet the Jeopardy clause. If he says noting and starts towards you, a rational person would be in fear of their life and it would be hard for a prosecutor to charge you depending on where the self defense shoot took place. Without all four elements being articulated after the shooting, it is a hard case for a self defense shooting. Educating people of those elements could go a long way towards putting peoples fears at rest, but blood is NOT running in the streets already. The people that do carry guns are overall a very responsible group and commit even fewer crimes than the general population that on't consider themselves criminals.
Dude, look at some of the replies to your OP. Lots of people immediately go to guns (when they are available) in order to "keep themselves safe" even with minimal threats (far below the "good shoot" requirements you listed) being present. As for "no one" shooting people over minor day-to-day greivances... Here's a few from within the last month, relating to "road rage" incidents only: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...d-rage-shooting-leaves-woman-dead-4134328.php http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/Dallas-motorist-shot-in-road-rage-incident-188579981.html http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55727360-78/driver-shooting-charged-fork.html.csp http://www.freep.com/article/201301...-death-in-Ypsilanti-Township?odyssey=nav|head http://www.thenewsherald.com/articles/2013/01/25/news/doc5102cc127cdd0388605195.txt http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/Ch...ing/-/14322302/18256754/-/4qd8em/-/index.html I wasn't immediately going to raise it, but since you did... There are a few undisputed facts: - Martin did not break any law, nor is there any evidence to suggest he intended to break any law, on the day in question. - Zimmerman identified Martin as a risk based solely on his race and attire. - Zimmerman was instructed by the police NOT to engage Martin, but chose to follow and eventually approach him anyway. - After the altercation, Zimmerman was arrested and had no injuries. - Martin, who had been unarmed and on his way back to his father's house, was shot dead. If Zimmerman had been black, and Martin had been hispanic or white, do you honestly believe this wouldn't have been handled differently by the police, the NRA, and the public at large? The fact is a precedent has already been set, that if you feel vaguely threatened (whether justified or not) you can shoot and get away with it.
