Trouble Trouble..


PDA






HANDLOADER
August 16, 2008, 11:05 PM
:(Has any one else began to notice this new trend in the gun forms? I read a hand full of gun chat forms just about every day and am begining to notice that people want to turn a harmless situition into a deadly situition. Has somthing changed about the way people think. Do people still believe in the value of human life. I have a good example of this someone is being yelled at and they draw their weapon. Then what? Are they going to kill someone just for yelling at them. NO! So why did they break leather then. And the answer I always recieve "I THOUGHT MY LIFE WAS IN REAL DANGER". I myself have only had to break leather once in my life and that was the scariest moment I have ever been put in. A home invasion gone wrong. I was home . They left but the point is I meet force with force didn't go over board just fought fire with fire. So why are people now wanting to get blood on there hands over the smallest things that truely don't become a life or death situation. I will leave you with that question to respond to.

God Bless

Handloader

If you enjoyed reading about "Trouble Trouble.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hso
August 16, 2008, 11:20 PM
Let's hope they're just internet posers beating their pigeon chests and letting out their warrior yop (after a hit from the inhaler) from their mother's basement across the vast expanse of the internet.

Either that or we're the TV/Movie/Video Game brainwashed knuckle dragging idiots the Antis tell everyone we are.

Luckily most THR members are neither of those extremes and those few that are get outed by the rest of the folks here pretty quickly.

FCFC
August 16, 2008, 11:21 PM
Has any one else began to notice this new trend in the gun forms? I read a hand full of gun chat forms just about every day and am begining to notice that people want to turn a harmless situition into a deadly situition...

So why are people now wanting to get blood on there hands over the smallest things that truely don't become a life or death situation. I will leave you with that question to respond to.
Yes, I've noticed that trend in gun forums.

I think that a certain segment of the gun owner/carrier population is kind of perturbed about politics, immigration, the economy, etc. So itís not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who come into their lives with some conflict or rudeness and they just sometimes feel the need and ability to escalate situations up to and including deadly force. Sometimes, even when it is not justified. Sometimes, when it is not prudent.

Basically, lot of these escalaters are not thinking too well. And more citizens are carrying today than at any time in history.

THR is one of the best gun forums around at keeping the real heavy bloodlust stuff out of the forum. Otherwise, it would be much worse here.

Arkie
August 16, 2008, 11:26 PM
Let's hope they're just internet posers beating their pigeon chests and letting out their warrior yop (after a hit from the inhaler) from their mother's basement across the vast expanse of the internet.

I thought that was quite funny.

Time for school to start so it should slow down.

azhunter122
August 17, 2008, 12:38 AM
I have noticed this too, and don't really appreciate people saying that if you draw your weapon you must shoot or don't draw at all. My dad had a situation where he could have shot someone but he simply drew his weapon and told them to leave. Everything worked out fine and the BG got caught. I am glad he didn't shoot. I saw the whole thing! It was back when I was a kid bout 4 years old.

Elza
August 17, 2008, 12:49 AM
hso: Let's hope they're just internet posers beating their pigeon chests and letting out their warrior yop (after a hit from the inhaler) from their mother's basement across the vast expanse of the internet.I believe that hso has it right. Otherwise the MSM would be overloaded with CHL shootings. And we all know that the MSM would be all over this like white on rice.

dalepres
August 17, 2008, 12:53 AM
Can you cite any examples of people trying to turn harmless situations into deadly? I just haven't seen it as a common thing in the forums I read.

antsi
August 17, 2008, 12:59 AM
don't really appreciate people saying that if you draw your weapon you must shoot or don't draw at all.

I'm not going to put words in anyone else's mouth, but to me, this is a sentiment that started out as a reasonable word of wisdom but then became distorted or misunderstood.

What I would agree with, generally, is the statement that if the situation does not justify the use of deadly force, then don't draw your weapon. If the aggressor is not presenting you with a lethal threat, then don't present him with one.

HOWEVER, this is NOT saying that once you draw you HAVE TO shoot.

If you are facing a lethal threat and draw your weapon, and then the situation de-escalates or the aggressor backs off or whatever, then of course you don't have to shoot. If the situation is no longer a lethal threat, then don't make it into one.

I think this statement about "don't draw unless you intend to shoot" was originally intended to dissuade people from using their guns for leverage or intimidation or emphasis in situations that wouldn't justify the use of lethal force. To clarify this, I'd say "Don't draw unless the situation would justify shooting."

Bezoar
August 17, 2008, 01:07 AM
dont draw if you arent going to shoot is the correct adage to use. ie, if you cannot or willnot shoot the mugger or wannabe assaulter to alleviate the risk of bodily harm to YOURSELF. then do not point a weapon at them, otherwise they will take it from you and beat you to death with it.

Drgong
August 17, 2008, 01:17 AM
Growing up in Gastonia I learned that one of the best things you can do is just walk away.

Some folks have this thing called "pride" where if someone calls you a Blank, you have to get in there face and then if they shove you pull out your gun. Stupid, Just be polite and you hopefully won't have to pull.


Now if a guy comes at me with a Butcher Blade, then its time to pull the gun (and in this case, the guy will get .38 speicals in his center mass)

Then agian, if I had to shoot someone, I know I would not have a problem right then... two hours later I might be puking, but thats just me being honest.

There is less "I can't wait to shoot someone" on THR then most fourms.

Pat-inCO
August 17, 2008, 01:48 AM
I think a portion of it is the anonymity afforded by "handles". How many people do you see with any part of their name? To me, that same group that tends to hide behind the "handle" does not supply city or state.

While there are some really good people that use a handle and think a lot before they post, they seem to be in more of a minority. Unfortunate.

230RN
August 17, 2008, 03:14 AM
And more citizens are carrying today than at any time in history.

Huh?

Feud
August 17, 2008, 03:16 AM
The internet has single handedly created more six foot five, 200 pound (all muscle), crack shot weapon experts, who have stormed the beaches of Normandy, and who cut crime in a given neighborhood by 67% just by their mere presence. Their situational awareness is superb due to their clairvoyance in knowing exactly who and what is a threat regardless of whether or not the threat has made any kind of overtly threatening actions, developed over years of study of Gun Mags from back "when they were good".

These Nietzschean Supermen now do us a service by warning humanity of how they will not only shoot when said clairvoyance allows them to realize that they are in danger, but that they are free of all legal ramifications of such. We would all be lucky, nay, blessed to reach their pinnacle of achievement one day.

:neener:

bogie
August 17, 2008, 03:26 AM
Hi there...

I'm one person sitting in a cube on the Washington DC beltway.

I am here to discredit you. I am here to make you look like the imbecile that we all know lives between Virginia and California.

I'm going to say things that are totally off the wall, and because you want to fit in with a group, you are going to agree with them. In fact, you are going to say things which will hurt the concepts you claim to believe in. Because I am a better debater than you. I was hired because of that.

===============

But it isn't about debates. It's about civil rights.

So... Think about who you jump to agree with on these internet forums...Think about HOW you think - are you fueling it with a momentary testosterone surge, or are you using your brain, and looking at all angles?

Because some of these folks may be looking to make headlines of a 60,000+ user internet forum.

yokel
August 17, 2008, 03:27 AM
So why are people now wanting to get blood on there hands over the smallest things that truely don't become a life or death situation?

Perhaps society is more violent than it once was and the norms of acceptable behavior have changed.

Frequently, these are people who donít know how to deal with anger, fear, or frustration in their daily lives.

Monkeybear
August 17, 2008, 03:48 AM
This is a quote a friend sent me on myspace a year or so back-

As people can speak "anonymously" or "pseudonymously" on the internet, people's true feelings often come out. And, as people let their true feelings out, society's shortcomings are exposed.

This is another great quote that I keep in mind while on the internet-

Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Troll

Anyway, I think the truth in this matter is to be found somewhere between these two quotes. Some of these people are serious and some are not. Some are somewhere in between and most likely do not truly mean what they say one way or another. Even if they do mean what they say, it is likely in principle only.

A friend at work was telling me about how if guns were banned the cops would never take his guns while he was alive. He looked me straight in the eyes and said "Let them come, we'll see how many of them it takes" or something like that. I looked him right back in the eye and said "Dude, you have like a wife and kid. Your not gonna get yourself killed or imprisoned. You have to take care of them." In principle he was willing to die for his Second Amendment rights.....maybe, but in a practical sense he was not.

So the truth is somewhere in between

1. Saying things that sound righteous and/or representative of their core concepts and views.
2. Saying things to "stir things up"
3. Saying things they actually believe and making us all look bad in the process.

Ala Dan
August 17, 2008, 05:00 AM
Only once, in my lifetime have I had "to break leather" as you say. Then,
and only then I thought I was 'bout to be shot by a thug my partner and
I had chased for miles; only too find out he was unarmed, at the time of
arrest. Case scenario goes kind'a like this, as best I can remember:

A black Pontiac Trans-Am passed us at a high rate of speed 'bout 0230
hrs one Sunday morning. With me driving, my partner and I turned 'round
on him; and pursuited him for several miles. After a lengthy chase, he
dedcided to pull into his very own driveway; but refused to get out of the
vechile, instead sliding further down into the drivers seat and placing his
right hand inside of the console. At this time, I draw my 6" S&W model
19 and yell, "DON"T DO IT"- "COME OUT WITH TOUR HANDS IN THE AIR".
Needless to say, it took several more minutes to persuade this thug to
exit the vechile. All ended well, as the subject was arrested for D.U.I.,
Reckless Endangerment, and Resisitng Arrest. Later, the judge dismissed
the Resisting Arrest Charge; and the defendant plead quilty to the other
charges, paid a stiff fine and went about his business - shaking hands
and apologizing to my partner and I as he exited the courtroom.

loop
August 17, 2008, 07:25 AM
I agree there are far too many chest thumpers out there.

I was a "baby boomer." That means I was draft eligible in 1969.

loop
August 17, 2008, 07:31 AM
I saw a post yesterday on these boards "ever shot anyone?"

um, yeah. I hate kids who just want to be ninjas.

I never shot anyone who wasn't an immediate threat to my life or others around me. I've cleared leather and not fired.

is there any way we can sort out the 15-year-olds from the rest or us?

I'd rather post about my really pretty Kimber. I just spent more on the rebuild than I did for the gun.

Glad I'm not a moderator here. I'd probably hit the delete key so often there would be no board.

loop
August 17, 2008, 07:32 AM
Screwed up the post with a wrong key. Hope it still makes sense.

LightningJoe
August 17, 2008, 08:06 AM
I have mainly encountered this phenomenon in the form of stories of people who say that somebody asked them for directions in a parking lot or some such and that the person might have been "interviewing" them.


Then hundreds of people respond with posts saying that in such a situation, they would go to condition red, draw their weapons, and yell "Halt!" And of course if the guy were dumb enough to continue asking for directions they would shoot him until he stopped asking.


When I suggest it is unwise to shoot unarmed people, I am invariably told that my brain is installed improperly.

jcwit
August 17, 2008, 09:11 AM
This same thing happenes daily on our highways. We call it ROAD RAGE. Where did this additude come from?

Apple a Day
August 17, 2008, 09:36 AM
When all is said and done, more is said than done.

I forgot who said that but they meant the Internet.

jcwit
August 17, 2008, 11:24 AM
Hey Apple a day excellent quote, will have to remember that one. How true, how true.

jkingrph
August 17, 2008, 11:28 AM
Back in the early 1970's I was traveling home on leave from USAF and was forced off highway in eastern Alabama. The display of my large revolver defused the situation and made the other parties decided that they wanted no part of me. No shots fired.

macadore
August 17, 2008, 11:40 AM
Let's hope they're just internet posers beating their pigeon chests and letting out their warrior yop (after a hit from the inhaler) from their mother's basement across the vast expanse of the internet.

I think that explains most of what we read on the internet. There are a lot of very young people and very immature people posting on the internet. When you call them on their immature and flawed logic, they always revert to an ad hominum argument. I am becoming increasingly tired of arguing with children.

Blarelli
August 17, 2008, 11:49 AM
Yeah, I see that kind of crap everywhere. Some guy says he was in a situation like a 7-11 being robbed (guy had a knife, and wasn't really threatening anybody in any way besides verbally), and the next guy says he would have drawn and shot the guy in the back of the head. And for what? Nobody was going to get hurt, and the guy will get away with $15, and a bunch of change. Everybody could see his face, see his license plate number. Why in the world shoot in a situation like that? Why even consider putting yourself through the litigation that goes along with a shooting for $15?

pbearperry
August 17, 2008, 11:50 AM
Older generations grew up interacting with the world and people.Newer generations have grown up on the internet and computer games.Reality has a whole new meaning.God help us all.

dalepres
August 17, 2008, 12:42 PM
A friend at work was telling me about how if guns were banned the cops would never take his guns while he was alive. He looked me straight in the eyes and said "Let them come, we'll see how many of them it takes" or something like that. I looked him right back in the eye and said "Dude, you have like a wife and kid. Your not gonna get yourself killed or imprisoned. You have to take care of them." In principle he was willing to die for his Second Amendment rights.....maybe, but in a practical sense he was not.


This is off topic and I, for one, don't believe the cold-dead-fingers hype; New Orleans proved it just ain't so. Even so, your statement doesn't make sense either. How many widows and orphans do you suppose there were after the Revolutionary War. How many widows and orphans are there as a result of the Iraq war? Defending freedom means giving up the safety and comfort of your 8 to 5 job and risking that your children will have a tougher, but more free, life.

BruceRDucer
August 17, 2008, 12:52 PM
Has any one else began to notice this new trend in the gun forms?

You bet.

Typically, it's a NEW MEMBER, who wants to start a topic, but doesn't know of anything sensible to post, so they invent some moral dilemma.

Then, when everyone else is sort of fighting it out, they never post again. LOL!:D

/

MinnMooney
August 17, 2008, 12:53 PM
from dalepres :
Can you cite any examples of people trying to turn harmless situations into deadly? I just haven't seen it as a common thing in the forums I read.

Just read the posts before yours. You'll see that almost everyone has seen the same trend among anonomous posters. I really don't think that a bunch of examples are needed. We've all been noticing the trend. I believe that it has to do with the "false bravery" of being able to say something when no one knows who you are. It's adolescent and stupid but anonimity breeds stupid actions.

cassandrasdaddy
August 17, 2008, 01:23 PM
too much time spent playing gta and the like

Old Sarge
August 17, 2008, 01:45 PM
I agree with pbearperry post #28. The older generations have indeed grown up, been through many trials and tribulations, and for the most part have "been there, done that" whereas the younger generations have lived with TV, Internet, TV games, and violence, all on imaginary screens. Have not lived in the "real world" situations enough to get a real handle on what they would do or not do, in a life or death situation.

Monkeybear
August 17, 2008, 02:49 PM
This is off topic and I, for one, don't believe the cold-dead-fingers hype; New Orleans proved it just ain't so. Even so, your statement doesn't make sense either. How many widows and orphans do you suppose there were after the Revolutionary War. How many widows and orphans are there as a result of the Iraq war?

I don't think my post was off topic at all. My point is simply that while some people talk of killing and dying it is not necessarily because they are trolls or violent people. It is because while they believe in the spirit of what they are saying they have not considered practical matters that would prevent them from following through. Practical matter such a wife and kid who need you alive. Practical matters such as the horrors of having to take the life of another.


Some guy says he was in a situation like a 7-11 being robbed (guy had a knife, and wasn't really threatening anybody in any way besides verbally), and the next guy says he would have drawn and shot the guy in the back of the head. And for what?

This is exactly what I am talking about. While the guy who said he would kill the robber might actually feel that people who commit armed robbery should be killed he may have had a hard time actually killing a man in such an instance. To kill is an traumatic and unnatural act, its also illegal and expensive. Any one of those things, and likely all four, would stop most chest thumpers from following though with the whole "shoot him in the back of the head" mentality.

Defending freedom means giving up the safety and comfort of your 8 to 5 job and risking that your children will have a tougher, but more free, life.

Everytime someone tries to justify violence they throw out something about "Defending Freedom" and the men and women who have died for this country.

This is off topic but I will respond to it anyways: If guns are banned there are better ways of fighting for freedom in America than shooting cops and/or making some poor police officer have to shoot you. The founding fathers gave us a nice Republic so we wouldn't have to shoot each other every time a law gets passed that we don't agree with.

dalepres
August 17, 2008, 09:49 PM
But I don't see the need for a "bug out bag"

You don't live in earthquake territory, torando territory, a flood plane, near a coast? You live in a fireproof home?

dalepres
August 17, 2008, 09:54 PM
I don't think my post was off topic at all.

Your post wasn't off topic. I was referring to my post by taking yours one level further away from the OP.

And I don't believe in shootouts with cops either. There is only one outcome for the guy who gets in a shootout with police. And even though I am very wary of growing police powers in this country, I am in agreement that there should be only one possible outcome of a shootout with the police.

mgkdrgn
August 17, 2008, 10:19 PM
Kinda like being a lifeguard I guess.

Some 3+ decades ago (ugh!) when I took the cert classes, I was taught that, as a lifeguard, if you ever got in the water it meant you probably weren't doing your job. You should have prevented the problem LONG before you had to get in the water.

But I guess that isn't as sexy as jumping in the pool and saving somebody, eh?

Zip7
August 17, 2008, 11:04 PM
I've met several people in real life who absolutely can't wait for a SHTF situation in which they might get a chance to shoot someone.

Mostly they have been young people, raised in cities, some ex-military w/ no combat experience, and almost all were involved in law enforcement.

66912
August 17, 2008, 11:36 PM
Scary "Zip7" really, really, Scary. That is one of the major reasons one of my eldest brothers gave up his stripes and left the force. I have my own level of preparedness regarding security of my home and person, It is all based on previous experience. Being prepared to defend yourself and others should not be anticipated in my opinion. This mentality could lead to some serious legal ramifications if you are indeed caught in a scenario and sound judgement is not utilized. I usually stop reading posts when they seem like an Internet based training scenario.
I do agree that it would be nice to be able to know the age of posters through their profile, but then again this day in age, Age discrimination can land you in court as well. Tread lightly people, and carry your big stick as quietly as you can. It's better that way. -66912

jnyork
August 17, 2008, 11:42 PM
My signature line says it all.

Phydeaux642
August 17, 2008, 11:52 PM
Either that or we're the TV/Movie/Video Game brainwashed knuckle dragging idiots the Antis tell everyone we are.


I would say it this way:

"Either that or they are TV/Movie/Video Game brainwashed knuckle dragging idiots" and leave it at that. I think that would cover 99% of the people that post in that fashion.

Saltwater27
August 18, 2008, 12:59 AM
I guess at 78 I have reached the point in life that Don Meridith of NFL fame (on and off the field) referred to when the game he was announcing was out of hand, 'turn out the lights the party's over'

Having spent 27 years in a combination of Navy and Coast Guard service, lived in 8 states, + AK and HI before they were states. Have never carried (except on a post service job) nor felt threatened to the extent I needed a weapon.

What has happened to this country, I can't even speak the language, 'dude' (not intended as a put down) is no more part of my vocabulary than 'spiffy' is to most reading this.

All that said, I see much wisdom and common sense in the previous posts not to mention a lot of humor and some dandy quotes.

Yes I also think it is the "Rambo wannabes", those of "spazzer' fame who probably could not hit a barn wall from the inside. I guess it is just a macho, feeling their oats, type thing. That AK or M4 in their hands mowing down milk jugs and saplings just pumps them up to King Kong size.

As far as me shooting anyone, any intruder IN MY HOME at night will never intrude again am I fortunate enough to get in the first shot, no 'hands up', no 'get out', just BOOM. A 12GA load of #4 buck at 20 feet requires no follow up shot.

A daylight intrusion would be a different story depending on how much I felt threatened.

Ah well, I guess all I can say is I hope it never happens.

________________________Old Sin Casts a Long Shadow_

FCFC
August 18, 2008, 01:08 AM
I think that, for the most part, the online gun forum members have been pretty much tolerating the Rambo wannabes and other gun guys who are kind of, um, extremist in their views about SD using deadly force. It's sad, because it reflects badly on the vast majority of gun owners/carriers who are certainly not gung ho about getting into an SD situation.

Those Rambo wannabes hurt or will hurt the rights and interests of regular ole gunnies. They are bad for 2A's continuing and expanding acceptance by the public.


Kinda like being a lifeguard I guess.

Some 3+ decades ago (ugh!) when I took the cert classes, I was taught that, as a lifeguard, if you ever got in the water it meant you probably weren't doing your job. You should have prevented the problem LONG before you had to get in the water.

Nice example. http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/41.gif

Savage Shooter
August 18, 2008, 01:57 AM
Either that or we're the TV/Movie/Video Game brainwashed knuckle dragging idiots the Antis tell everyone we are.
just another case of couch comando:D so sad... so very sad

Double Naught Spy
August 18, 2008, 06:30 AM
Do people still believe in the value of human life.

Yes. Mine.

Titan6
August 18, 2008, 07:11 AM
Quote:
Some guy says he was in a situation like a 7-11 being robbed (guy had a knife, and wasn't really threatening anybody in any way besides verbally), and the next guy says he would have drawn and shot the guy in the back of the head. And for what?

This is exactly what I am talking about. While the guy who said he would kill the robber might actually feel that people who commit armed robbery should be killed he may have had a hard time actually killing a man in such an instance. To kill is an traumatic and unnatural act, its also illegal and expensive. Any one of those things, and likely all four, would stop most chest thumpers from following though with the whole "shoot him in the back of the head" mentality.

Actually no that is not remotely true.

Killing someone in of itself is not illegal or unnatural or in many cases even immoral. People kill people every day. Animals do the same thing. It is old as Cain and Able, older than David and Goliath far older than civilization. In order to create a veneer of polite society we have established rules that pertain to the circumstances under which people are allowed to kill other people but the killing itself is allowed under the right set if circumstances. Even the hard and fast religous rules such as the Ten Commandments in "Thou shall not Kill" have plenty of exceptions in the fine print.

Certainly our governments that are run by people just like us and are a direct reflection of the type of society we have, have little compunction about killing.

Monkeybear
August 18, 2008, 09:19 AM
Killing someone in of itself is not illegal or unnatural or in many cases even immoral.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

Titan6
August 18, 2008, 02:20 PM
I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

I suppose so but I am curious, this is an odd position to stake on a board about deadly weapons. What are the considerations for soldiers and police officers?

jonmerritt
August 18, 2008, 06:08 PM
All life is sacred, even the bg's life, I don't want to kill anyone, I also value my life, or my family's , just a little more than the bg's life. If I have to pull my weapon for self defense, the BG still has a chance to walkaway, befor I pull the trigger, the choice is up to the BG, the BG put me in that situation, the BG can walk away at anytime, untill he forces my hand. God help us all.

takhtakaal
August 21, 2008, 08:39 AM
You know, I was reading this thread, and it occurred to me that the troll problem could be handled very neatly if the board were to weed out the 0 and 1 post wonders after a certain amount of time, sort of a "develop or die," as it were. The only area that a registered user can see that a non-registered one can't, so far as I know, are the classifieds.

If you enjoyed reading about "Trouble Trouble.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!