You missed the point. The post was about the use of deadly force in a manner that does not endanger the safety of others. And in the case at hand, such use of force would have been done in self defense:I brought all of this viewpoint up- Do to the fact… In Op, It never was
- A important fact that should not have been overlooked.
- Someone reading, and not having information could perceive it as totally just to intervene if one has a Carry permit. To Separate the two courses of thought is Prudent and Necessary.
! I was between the man and the manager, and under the circumstances, I could not leave.
Plus- How realistic is the Video, Pasadena Cali….
You missed the point. The post was about the use of deadly force in a manner that does not endanger the safety of others. And in the case at hand, such use of force would have been done in self defense:
I did muddy the water by saying "intervene" and "lives". But it was really not an "important fact", as my life would have been in danger, had the robber proceeded.
Would I have slipped out, had it been possible to do so in perfect safety? Most probably.
What do you think was unclear?To be clear about some items. Items like that important one ,at least.
What? Do I understand that you believe that something that you believe important was overlooked in the OP, but you do not care to say what it was?Kleanbore- One word for you
Apathetic,
I really have no interest
Yes, and complying with Rule 4 has to be part of "situational awareness".The Four Rules should be integrated with use of tactics and strategy...
Yes, and complying with Rule 4 has to be part of "situational awareness".