Anti-gun forums has changed my mind...

[Randall53]

Yep...I've been reading these anti forums for a couple of weeks now and I've changed my mind.

Not about the gun issue of course... My wife and I both love to shoot and do so weekly. We go through several hundred rounds apiece each month at the range. We are in the beginning stages of getting involved in competition shooting and have applied for membership at a local private range with some great competition matches and events.

The thing the anti-gun forums has changed in me however, is my thinking towards using my CCW to aid someone I don't know, who's being attacked! I was not only surprised, but appalled at how many of those poorly informed, sadly blinded people that have made the statement that they do NOT want any of us who carry weapons for self defense to come to their aid for any reason at all. It seems they would rather call 911 and wait on the police to get there. I do applaud the LEO's nationwide and appreciate their dedication and abilities...but even they know they can't be everywhere at all times. If that were possible, there would be no crime....but their is crime in the streets, and lots of it!

I can just imagine the response these people would have towards a legally armed citizen even in the event one of us saved one of them from being raped, robbed, or even killed! I can just imagine what they would say to the police right after the incident. They would surely side with the criminal and testify against you should their be litigation on behalf of the criminal if you were forced to shoot. In the event the criminal was shot and not killed, they would probably be hugging and kissing as you were hauled off to jail and the criminal received a very large settlement from you for interveining in his idea of "gainful employment" or "fun".

I suppose I'll have to reserve my legally carried handgun for the sole protecton of my family and myself.

 

[HighVelocity]

It's real easy for an anti to say they wouldn't want help when they're sitting at the computer staring at the internet. If they were getting beaten or raped I bet it wouldn't matter who tried to rescue them.

 

[Commissar Gribb]

I think most people who make statements like that haven't been in a position where they felt like their life was at stake. I'm pretty sure if any one of them were being assaulted/ raped etc. that they would NOT mind a little help from you and your CCW.

 

[Husker1911]

Isn't this a great country? Idiots free to post most anything upon a board.

I'd like to parachute jump from an airplane. Easy for me to say, safe upon Terra Firma. I don't think one truly knows if they can really jump until they're standing in the doorway, thousands of feet above the earth. Wind howling in your ears, sphincter clenched tighter than any other time in your life. Adrenolin and doubt pumping thru your veins. Will you jump now?

It's sorta like this with the sheeple posting they would rather not a ccw assist them in a time of dire emergency. Easy to say now, safe in your home, posting thru a computer. Put them in a dark alley, three thugs taking turns and beating them when they didn't cooperate. Hey, there's no atheists in a foxhole!

 

[CombatArmsUSAF]

If I don't use my gun to prevent a liberal from being killed, than that's one less liberal I have to worry about taking my right to carry away.

 

[Spot77]

I was thinking the same thing, but I truly wouldn't wish death upon anybody just because they're an idiot.

 

[GRB]

Just remember this before you act:

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

If you can live with that you should be ok even if you decide to take action and help an anti gun nut.

 

[Hardware]

...Will you jump now?

Simple answer.
Are the wings still on? Yes. Don't jump.
Are the engines still turning? Yes. Don't jump.
Is the plane about to hit a solid object? No. Don't jump.
Is anything on fire? No. Don't jump.

As far as saving folk, if they are screaming for help it would be pretty poor manners of them to criticize you for the way you choose to help them. Just another reason to save your energy and only save children and animals. Adults are supposed to know better!

 

[Smoke]

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

Let's say you jump in to help save an anti's life (either known anti or unknown) and things go well but not exactly perfect....who do you think will be named in the law suit?

Smoke

 

[Baba Louie]

I understand both Randall53 and Glenn B's comments/sentiments and will only add this... If I, as an armed, CCW morally responsible person, do not stop said criminal act of violence then and there, how well will I be able to live with myself when the same criminal commits the same act again and again on others?

I may not have a legal responsibility to act in defense of others, but do I have a moral obligation (Social Contract) to stop goblins from preying on the innocent? At the very least should I act as a good witness and assist the victim after the fact or should I just walk on by whistling Dixie?

Being brought up as a Boy Scout lends a certain mindset to the remainder of your days... Be Prepared. Help Others. While some may curse and denigrate your assistance, and we all know that doing the right thing can oftentimes be a taxing burden, I was brought up to render assistance to those in need when I am prepared and able.

YMMV

 

[R.H. Lee]

Exactly. Who are we to interfere with Darwinism?

 

[Chipperman]

State law would play heavily into this, but if they are calling for "Help" during the incident, then they should not be able to sue/prosecute you for doing so.

Having multiple witnesses affirming that they were calling for "Help" would be good.

 

[Werewolf]

NOW... RileyMC truly does get it.

Personally - if I absolutely knew that the person in dire need of assistance was a die hard anti who had in the past voiced his/her opinion that they would not want the assistance of a CCW to save their sorry posterior then I'd just stand back and enjoy (yes I said enjoy) the show.

OTOH the liklihood of that situation ever presenting itself is about the same as that of a snowball making it thru a day in the fiery furnaces of hell... SO - I'd feel morally obligated to step in and provide what ever assistance I could within the boundaries of the law. Why the boundaries of the law? I would risk prison to save my own butt or my family but risking prison for a stranger - seems a bit stupid to me.

 

[Infidel]

If they were getting beaten or raped I bet it wouldn't matter who tried to rescue them.

I'm pretty sure if any one of them were being assaulted/ raped etc. that they would NOT mind a little help from you and your CCW.

True enough, but the problem comes when everything has settled down, they are saved and safe, and then they revert to form and they turn, and testify, against you.

 

[Rotorflyr]

posted by Baba Louie: I may not have a legal responsibility to act in defense of others, but do I have a moral obligation (Social Contract) to stop goblins from preying on the innocent? At the very least should I act as a good witness and assist the victim after the fact or should I just walk on by whistling Dixie?

You are correct in (most cases) have no legal responsibility to act in defense of others (there are exceptions to this rule: Sienfield anyone???) however you could very well have a legal liability if you do try to help and the person you are trying to help is (further) injuried or killed in the process. If you think that in our litigious society the family of a crime victim won't sue you for damages when you tried to help, think again. I know EMT's who when off duty and pass an accident scene don't want to stop and help as a first responder due to lawsuits brought against some who have when the outcome was poor.

Granted if I have a CCW and have a weapon on me, I wouldn't walk by an attempted rape without doing something (including using my cell to call the cops), but I probably wouldn't draw my weapon in the case of a purse snatching/simple robbery situation/assault* (assault as in fight) I would still be using the cell phone however, so yes in a moral sense (and this is just my opinion) you should at the very least assist the victim after the fact and act as a witness.

Oh and as Werewolf said, the likelyhood of knowing that the person in trouble was hardcore anti and had said that no matter what, if they are in trouble, they don't want a civilain with a ccw permit to come to their aid, is extremly slim**!

*situation dependent
**and even if I knew I would help anyway, depending on the situation (such as a rape)

 

[Third_Rail]

Personally - if I absolutely knew that the person in dire need of assistance was a die hard anti who had in the past voiced his/her opinion that they would not want the assistance of a CCW to save their sorry posterior then I'd just stand back and enjoy (yes I said enjoy) the show.

I could never do this. Even if I knew they'd want to put me in jail for saving their life with a gun, I will still protect fellow humans. To get rid of the aggressor is a benefit to all humanity, IMHO.

 

[XLMiguel]

OK, I can accept that guns aren't for everyone, and if you don't want to use one for SD, you should at least have an alternate plan. What strikes me about most of 'those people' is the fact that they don't have a Plan B - they are fundamentally too cowardly to fight for their own lives and expect someone else to take care of them.

IMO, they are parasites.

Then there's the basic hypocracy in that they don't want guns around, but the first thing they do WTSHTF is call for someone with a gun to come and save them. I always get a huge giggle out of the reaction you get when you explain to them that legally, the cops don't have to come to their aid, and there's nothing you can do about it (except be food for the predators).

And what if the cops have something beter to do when you're in trouble, say like someone drove a plane into a building or blew up the local refinery or decided to riot because Michael Jackson got railroaded - you're on your own, Sparky. Again, no obligation to protect the individual (and I mean no disrespct to the LEO's, but there aren't enough of them to go around)

Pacifism (at least as it's practiced by the elites) really is a privilege of the protected. Given their attitude, though, they may be a dying breed

 

[4v50 Gary]

It's rather easy for an anti to be cavalier and in the safety of their home write on their computer that they would rather an armed citizen desist from saving them and await the arrival of the police. While I wish no harm upon any anti, wait until they're being killed, mugged or raped and let's see if they're as selective as to who their savior may be.

 

[Mike Hull]

Shouldn't they be made to wear signs, much like a person wears a medic alert bracelet, or necklace for life threatening allergies etc.

Except in the case of these people(?), it would have to be larger because you wouldn't be able to see the smaller ones in a scuffle or rape.

The same should apply to their homes. Big signs out front like real estate signs saying, "No Gun Zone" or something of that nature.

And, do these same people still call the police to come to help them with guns when they're in trouble? If they do/would, then it's plain hypocrisy and cowardice on their part.

 

[P95Carry]

There are so many lucky anti's - folks who know of crime but have never been touched by it. They bolster their liberalism with these absurd statements about ''I'd rather die than shoot'' ..... ''I will just do what the BG says'' .... ''call 911 - it's the cop's job''... and further hogwash.

I honestly wish there was some way for your average anti - to be at the ''sharp end'' of some situation - where they were under so much fear and stress from the possibility of attack - that they would actually feel the overpowering desire for something - with which to answer back.

I have tried to paint scenarios to some of these people .... ''imagine you are at gunpoint and have to watch your wife/daughter be raped'' . but for some they either lack enough imagination fertility - or just continue to have heads in dark places ... they seem to refuse to ''get it''.

Mind you - as someone commented here recently - probably many anti's do ''get it'' but their agenda is so strong toward removing guns from the world that they will continue to promote said agenda - regardless. They are not as stupid as we might imagine - but scheming - yes.... and so dangerous.

 

[wolf]

when i told my next door neighbor that i have handguns for self defense..he said that was ok with him & all that...but then i told him what self defense meant to me..just that-my self defense...

told him if i heard your wife screaming for help i will call 911..he seemed puzzled at first..i told him...im not walking into your house not knowing whats in there..there could be 3 guys with guns for all i know...

he told me he was fine with guns as defense weapons..his sister is in the marines etc...

told him...perhaps your wife should take some lessons and visit the range perhaps even have a weapon for her own self defense..that didnt seem to be in his/their defense plan

the mindset of "its ok for you to have a self defense weapon, but i don't/will never need one" is irresponsible to me

wolf

 

[Bobarino]

this is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. if you help, you'll get sued by the dead criminal's family. if you don't, the anti that claimed they didn't want you to help will sue you for not aiding them. still i'd rather get sued for doing a good deed and helping someone than letting someone get hurt and letting the criminal get away.

Bobby

 

[Rotorflyr]

P95Carry said: "imagine you are at gunpoint and have to watch your wife/daughter be raped"

This is at best a weak scenario because if you are truly "at gunpoint" then an attempt to draw your own weapon will end with you shot/dead and your wife/daughter raped anyway, you shouldn't be in a position where the BGs (and in this case there would have to be more then one if your at gunpoint AND forced to watch a rape), the confrontation should have been ended prior to it getting to this point

wolf said:the mindset of "it's ok for you to have a self defense weapon, but i don't/will never need one" is irresponsible to me

Why do you feel it's irresponsible (Im hoping you just phrased this badly) for those that choose not to carry/have a self-defense weapon?? It's a personal choice if one wants to or not, I would agree that the thinking that "I will never *need* a self defense weapon is asinine, but not necessarily irresponsible, there are plenty of people in this country (and world for that matter) that are never put/forced into a situation where they need a weapon, or even need to defend themselves.
I would go on to agree that it would be irrsepopnsible (moronic really) for them to say "it's ok for you have one, but I don't (will never) need one because you live next door and will come rushing over if there is trouble"

Part of the problem with (some) pro's is the same as with (most) anti's, they think everyone should believe/do what they believe/do. One of my best friends would probably be condidered to be on the anti side of things around here to the effect of the fact that he will never own a firearm, nor does he want one brought into his home, but he also respects my right to own/carry and have them in my home.

 

[Powderman]

You know, I read a really sad post on a forum--perhaps it was here at THR.

It was where a guy was showing his AR15 at a family get together to his sister. His sister's fiance, a rabid (and I do mean RABID) anti-gunner, saw the AR15 and did the human equivalent of vapor lock. Apparently, this guy WENT INTO ANOTHER ROOM, CURLED INTO A FETAL POSITION, AND WHIMPERED AND CRIED AT THE MERE APPEARANCE OF THE EVIL BLACK RIFLE, who was so fraught and full of hideous, evil intentions that it apparently had demons dancing around the muzzle.

I read this post. Then I read it again. And again.

I turned away from the computer, literally sick to my stomach. I have been exposed to anti-gunners before--but this is the first time that I had read an account of someone reduced to a quivering mass of protoplasm by the mere sight of a firearm.

I agree with P95--the only reason that these folks are the way they are is because they have not EVER been exposed to anything resembling violence or violent action. Truly, an eye-opener.

 

[P95Carry]

This is at best a weak scenario

Rotorflyr ....... true enough - my ''example'' was phrased very loosely - a means to purely illustrate what might make folks think differently.

We (CCW's) of course do or should be more alert and cognisant of what is going on - to yes, be able to prevent a situation reaching that stage. I know anti's and just plain ''ordinary folks'' who all but admit they live condition white 24/7. Once people have their eyes more open, gain some situational awareness, the they can see the probable benefits to a more useful condition yellow very often - no paranoia, just awareness..

Let's say in my simplified example, we somehow manage to make the point that if a person is empowered thru a suitable means of (potential) self defence, then there is a fighting chance. The attempt always is to try and ''shock'' the feeble into imagining at least some scenario, where they or loved ones are in fear of their lives, or sexual integrity - that's all. Forcing them if you like to think outside of the box - for a change!!

Your point is taken - I know what you mean.