Responsibility and the Armed Citizen

[Kleanbore]

alas, since the laws of deadly force within these 50 states are a quagmire of judicial mishmash which even the legal beagles and courts consistently interpret erroneously...so whose deadly force statutory mandates or conflict resolution guidance are you pontificating citizens utilize?

Regarding the use of force for self defense or for the defense of others, the laws of most US jurisdictions are largely very common.

There are differences in terms of a duty to retreat, which by definition would encompass differences that have to do with castle doctrine. Know those, and you are good to go anywhere.

 

[Craig_AR]

"A soft answer turns away wrath." That's conflict resolution in a nutshell.

For advanced education on this claim, and how there are parts of society with which this approach absolutely does not work, search for videos of lectures by Dr. William Aprill (now deceased).

 

[Kleanbore]

For advanced education on this claim, and how there are parts of society with which this approach absolutely does not work,

Absolutely true.

search for videos of lectures by Dr. William Aprill (now deceased).

Good suggestion.

 

[tubeshooter]

Yes - there are always (extremely) violent offenders who would kill you anyway after handing over your wallet. Nothing to be done about that.

You probably never had a chance against such individuals anyway.


But maybe for some people who are in the ground over parking spots, pet scat or something as minor as that - the path of de-escalation might have had merit, I would humbly suggest.

 

[Kleanbore]

You probably never had a chance against such individuals anyway.

I would not so assume.

 

[tubeshooter]

So - what do you "assume" ?

[EDIT: I said "probably". What are you looking for? A class to make it right??]

 

[Kleanbore]

So - what do you "assume" ?

Simply that my "never having a chance" is not probable, if I do my part.

What are you looking for? A class to make it right??

Mindset, skillset, toolset.

 

[tubeshooter]

There are plenty of LEO and others who had all that and still did not prevail.
"Did their part" and what not.


But point taken. I hereby revise my "never" to "1% chance"...
... since "probably" wasn't good enuf for you...

 

[Kleanbore]

There are plenty of LEO and others who had all that and still did not prevail.
"Did their part" and what not.

How many?

But point taken. I hereby revise my "never" to "1% chance"...
... since "probably" wasn't good enuf...

I do not think that facts near that out.

 

[tubeshooter]

So you disparage my "probably never" and ask for stats for your rebuttal?
Like nobody ever did what was asked and still died?


Fine. Pick those nits.
Hope you made whatever point you have the "facts" to back up.

 

[shafter]

For advanced education on this claim, and how there are parts of society with which this approach absolutely does not work, search for videos of lectures by Dr. William Aprill (now deceased).

This is true, but against someone who truly means you harm, or is too mentally gone to understand, there really isn't any deescalation short of the application of some level of force.

However many violent encounters begin over something trivial and escalate into violence. These are easily avoidable from my experience talking down thousands of people.

 

[Kleanbore]

So you disparage my "probably never" and ask for stats for your rebuttal?

No.

Like nobody ever did what was asked and still died?

Your comment did not address compliance.

 

[tubeshooter]

Simply that my "never having a chance" is not probable, if I do my part.

Mindset, skillset, toolset.

So what's "your part"?

And didn't the late LEOs have mindset, skillset, toolset?
Didn't they "do their part"?
Granted they are tasked with going in harm's way...

Don't people get ambushed and/or killed anyway?
LEO or not?
Compliance or not?
Ever heard of "getting the drop" on someone?
Did they have a chance? More than 1%?


Feel free not to answer any of this if you're just arguing to argue...

 

[Kleanbore]

And didn't the late LEOs have mindset, skillset, toolset?
Didn't they "do their part"?
Granted they are tasked with going in harm's way...

Would you not say the same about the many who prevail?

Don't people get ambushed and/or killed anyway?
LEO or not?

Some do. How many, I do not know.

Compliance or not?

The statement by @Craig_AR was that there are elements of our society for whom deescalation does not work. That should take us to Plan B, if we are not already there..

Ever heard of "getting the drop" on someone?

That, of course is someting that we would hope to avoid--by doing our part.

We train for it.

Is your point that intended victims. do not have a chance?

 

[shafter]

Typically what happens is that someone who hasn't done any planning or training sees you as a target of opportunity and makes their move. Your awareness and preparation should see you through.

Some scenarios are unwinnable though if someone really wants you dead and has a plan.

 

[fastbolt]

While there's the current social fascination with 'deescalation', if it were always possible in all interactions, police (or the Public) wouldn't need to be armed in the first place. It's not like attempting to deescalate and defuse situations is exactly a new concept, either. Reasonableness has been a 'thing' for some time. Common sense? Sadly, not so much ...

 

[Kleanbore]

De-escalation is of limited benefit, and is usually a last choice after avoidance, evasion, and escape.

I wouldn't recommend trying it except in cases of misunderstanding.

 

[tubeshooter]

Still never heard what "your part" was exactly in all this time.
No stats, definition, etc.
Not quoted, yet still mentioned in post #64.

Please clarify.

And I never said that all intended victims have no chance.
Straw man if I ever saw one.
Why would any one, including myself, bother to carry otherwise ??


Do people who don't "do their part" deserve whatever they get ??

 

[Kleanbore]

Still never heard what "your part" was exactly in all this time.... Please clarify.

How about avoiding obvious danger, acting prudently and politely, remaining alert, maintaining skills, being properly equipped, and acting appropriately. quickly, and effectively?

And I never said that all intended victims have no chance.

You said "I....revise my 'never' to '1% chance' ". Okay, not all.

Why would any one, including myself, bother to carry otherwise ??

I have been wondering about your thoughts on that.

Do people who don't "do their part" deserve whatever they get ??

I do not think so, but they are more likely to get it.

 

[tubeshooter]

How about avoiding obvious danger, acting prudently and politely, remaining alert, maintaining skills, being properly equipped, and acting appropriately. quickly, and effectively?

Thanks.
Things still can not work out even with all that.
And nothing against the victim either.


I feel like this is getting away from "Responsibility and the Armed Citizen" and more towards responding to me personally. So I'll stop here. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[Kleanbore]

Thanks.
Things still can not work out even with all that.
And nothing against the victim either.

Of course. There are no guarantees.

I feel like this is getting away from "Responsibility and the Armed Citizen" and more towards responding to me personally. So I'll stop here. Thanks for the discussion.

Nothing here is about you.

 

[tubeshooter]

Well - in the sense that I've been quoted...

 

[Kleanbore]

Upon reflection, I have edited my list of suggested ideas to add the following:

• Never initiate a confrontation, and avoid saying or doing anything to provoke one.