What exactly is 'the government system' supposed to do in order to keep something like this from ever happening?
Shootout in Walmart parking lot.
- Thread starter AnselHazen
- Start date
- Status
What exactly is 'the government system' supposed to do in order to keep something like this from ever happening?
420Stainless
Member
Put repeat offenders in jail and keep them there? If they can't do something, why do they exist?
You will need to be more specific. What repeat offenders, what previous crimes, and when does it become a life sentence?
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Guys, that's simply so far off topic as to be pointless. Putting more people away for longer is a fine plan (so please do call your local representatives and offer to pay a lot more in taxes so we can afford to build jails and lock up more people), but it doesn't speak at all to the question of how to act in a violent situation such as this -- which will continue to happen because of human nature, no matter how many people we lock up.
420Stainless
Member
I don't need to be more specific. You are looking for a specific point to pick at rather than argue the general purpose of the justice system. Does the justice system exist to react, or is its purpose to keep society safe? If you believe it is only a system of reaction and punishment, then you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion that logical argument will not solve. I believe it is intended to prevent crime. At least in this person's area, it does not appear to be doing so. If it is not, I will not blame a citizen for taking action. There is immediate concern for safety and there is long term concern for safety. Perhaps this person's mindset is that preserving his families immediate safety is futile if lawbreakers feel bold and free enough to use the Walmart parking lot for their dealings.
420Stainless
Member
I am attempting to address a potential mindset of the citizen and why I don't see a reason to criticize his action. Nothing can prevent all crime, but when criminals are bold enough to take over public shopping areas what are the citizen's supposed to do?
The general purpose of the justice system is not to prevent any violent event from ever happening by permanently locking up all criminals.
This should seem particularly obvious since these things must occur in order to produce the violent offenders you referenced.
If that is the person's mindset they are doing it wrong.
Not relevant, and I don't recall seeing anything about criminals taking over public shopping areas anyway.
What are citizen's supposed to do? We would say, see to their safety and their family's and then call the police. Reading the thread should have already pointed that out.
Citizen's are not police officers because they carry a gun, and carrying a gun does not give you the job of going out and taking down criminals.
Last edited:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That borders on "taking the law into your own hands" and acting as citizen enforcer is neither condoned by the laws (again, beyond the very treacherous ground of "citizens' arrest" law), nor something we're going to condone and applaud here.
A lot of average Joe citizens who wade into situations with their guns drawn to make things right end up in jail, and that's wholly appropriate. We are a nation of law, not a nation of might, and taking the law into your own hands because you think the justice system isn't what you want it to be is a terrible mistake.
Remember, breaking the law even with good intentions still makes you nothing more or less than what you're railing against: a criminal.
A lot of average Joe citizens who wade into situations with their guns drawn to make things right end up in jail, and that's wholly appropriate. We are a nation of law, not a nation of might, and taking the law into your own hands because you think the justice system isn't what you want it to be is a terrible mistake.
Remember, breaking the law even with good intentions still makes you nothing more or less than what you're railing against: a criminal.
420Stainless
Member
I won't argue any more. I understand how the law is supposed to work and I certainly don't advocate breaking the law in order to apprehend other law breakers. But when it isn't working in someone's neighborhood, I don't think the attitude should be that's just too bad for them and their family. Not everyone can afford to live in the high rent district and I would argue that no one, regardless of where they live, should feel as though they should be in danger going to the local Walmart just because that's the way the system works (or doesn't work).
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,241
Could have guessed it was drug related
http://wgme.com/news/local/four-arrested-following-shots-fired-outside-walmart
I guess we should just make all drugs legal, not breaking any laws if they don't exist.
And an example the revolving door works.
http://wgme.com/news/local/four-arrested-following-shots-fired-outside-walmart
I guess we should just make all drugs legal, not breaking any laws if they don't exist.
And an example the revolving door works.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
The only zebras who can live free from the constant knowledge that the lions are there, just outside the herd, ready to pounce, are the ones in the zoo.
That's life.
But yeah, well, I'd like it if that were the case, too. It would be nice if everyone felt safe to go about their business. It's been many years since I was in Augusta, ME, and I don't recall whether it seemed like a safe community or not.
But of course, we're told that opiods are the new epidemic of our age and that their abuse and the folks who sell them (and I'd guess, fight over them) are ubiquitous from Beverly Hills to Appalachia. So, as though we all needed yet another reason to "Watch Six," feeling safe anywhere is as much of an illusion as ever it was.
Maybe it is better that we get these little reminders from time to time not to ever believe we live in a "nerfed" world where safety can be taken for granted, especially in the blind hope that police forces will prevent crime.
Last edited:
Where is the information detailing how this neighborhood has been hopelessly overrun by criminals to the point where men feel the need to abandon their families right by a gunfight to make citizen's arrests because the police can't or wont'?
420Stainless
Member
I thoroughly agree that the world is, and always will be a dangerous place. But I do not accept the notion that people should tolerate predators among them and just assume it is the natural order of things. The lion wanders into a herd of zebras every few days and picks one off because the zebra's temperament and instinct is to run. If for some reason, the zebras decided not to run and the herd surrounded the lion and stomped it into the ground I would not lament how stupid the zebra is for standing against the lion.
The lion does not wander into human populations on a regular basis and take one every few days even though humans are less physically equipped to either escape or defend themselves against the lion than most of the lion's other prey. Instead, lions that were inclined to do so have been speared or shot over time to the point where the lion is no longer inclined by instinct or in numbers to do so. It still happens occasionally, but it is no longer the natural order of things due to humans not tolerating that part of the natural order.
The lion does not wander into human populations on a regular basis and take one every few days even though humans are less physically equipped to either escape or defend themselves against the lion than most of the lion's other prey. Instead, lions that were inclined to do so have been speared or shot over time to the point where the lion is no longer inclined by instinct or in numbers to do so. It still happens occasionally, but it is no longer the natural order of things due to humans not tolerating that part of the natural order.
Last edited:
420Stainless
Member
The crime rates are comparatively low in Maine. But does that mean the people of Maine should be tolerant of the occasional invasion into their living environment? For that matter, would it be ok for someone in south Chicago to do what these people did since they truly are surrounded by out of control crime? I would assume not based on your approach and that is why I said the specific doesn't matter.
So what is with the "when it isn't working"? What are you referring to? Some random hypothetical situation not related to the one we are discussing in this thread?
420Stainless
Member
When you have gun shots being traded in the Walmart parking lot, it isn't working.
Good Ol' Boy
Member
Bottom line, his actions were not what's normally accepted or taught in SD regarding following the law. Fortunately for him and his family, it seems he got off. But I would urge that it's not commonplace nor to be expected.
In a nut shell that's really all that needs to be said, regardless of what our personal opinions are of what he did.
In a nut shell that's really all that needs to be said, regardless of what our personal opinions are of what he did.
So anytime, anywhere, that violence takes place, it is up to us, the armed citizens, to step up and take the role of police because the government isn't getting it done.
How about not.
Apachedriver
Member
I'm just amazed that there are people in favor of jumping into a violent situation without any intel.
I get the whole "community standing up for itself", etc, etc. But without intel? And placing the family at risk? You can't say they were far enough away because the wife said one bad guy was close to her car when she screamed at him about her kids. They were too close and at risk.
If he'd died trying to save a specific individual(s), sad story of a hero.
If he were killed walking in blindly OR full of bravado, OR, if his family member were shot/killed when he chose to protect someone else instead, it'd be the pitiful story of a fool.
Oh, and since the bad guys were already engaged firing, they didn't stop because he had a gun and shouted commands. They stopped because in the altercation, there wasn't anything they valued enough to get shot by a third party, whom they might've initially thought was a cop. Cop or not, they would've turned and engaged him in a heartbeat if they had a valued enough reason.
He was lucky. Glad it worked out for them.
I get the whole "community standing up for itself", etc, etc. But without intel? And placing the family at risk? You can't say they were far enough away because the wife said one bad guy was close to her car when she screamed at him about her kids. They were too close and at risk.
If he'd died trying to save a specific individual(s), sad story of a hero.
If he were killed walking in blindly OR full of bravado, OR, if his family member were shot/killed when he chose to protect someone else instead, it'd be the pitiful story of a fool.
Oh, and since the bad guys were already engaged firing, they didn't stop because he had a gun and shouted commands. They stopped because in the altercation, there wasn't anything they valued enough to get shot by a third party, whom they might've initially thought was a cop. Cop or not, they would've turned and engaged him in a heartbeat if they had a valued enough reason.
He was lucky. Glad it worked out for them.
Last edited:
azrocks
Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2016
- Messages
- 659
Incredible post, Sam. The whole thing.
AnselHazen
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2015
- Messages
- 380
Driving to work this week I heard another radio interview, done a little later than the first I heard. The updated information I got from it is that they could not leave the scene. The car was boxed in by panicked shoppers. He could not have just driven off to safety. They were stuck. In all probability that realization may be what made him act.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Ahhhhh! More information. Good!
If that is indeed true -- if they really couldn't leave by simply driving away -- that narrows and alters the set of other "reasonable" responses.
Would getting out of the car and fleeing on foot be a good idea? Quite possibly. Out the lee side doors, stay low, move quickly and steadily to better cover, hopefully perpendicularly to the lines of battle.
Or, quite possibly not. If they were close enough to be screaming at the goons then getting out might be leaving even the meager cover provided by the car.
Would staying put be the right choice? Wow, that's a tough sell, because most of us know what a car door WON'T do to stop a bullet. Of course, depending on angle and proximity, it may indeed have been the right choice, if the general direction of fire was parallel to your location, it might be substantively safer to stay put, get low, and hope for the car's sheet metal to slow or deflect any glancing hits or ricochets for the next two or three seconds that most gunfights actually last. Certainly IF that were the case, getting out of the car and calling attention to yourself would probably be the wrong choice, as drawing fire toward your car and family would make things much worse.
And, the truth is, being trapped in extremely close proximity to something like this might be one of the very definitions of being "engaged" in the fight without much choice in the matter.
As always, drawing a gun is what one does when there are no other viable choices left. If this guy was trapped with his family in the midst of a gunfight, he may have had no better choices.
That's not how he and his wife spun the situation in interviews, but the gulfs between "what happened," and "what someone actually said in an interview," and "what got written in the article," are generally pretty wide.
AnselHazen
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2015
- Messages
- 380
Up here it's all main stream liberal anti gun controlled news media so to hear it told straight from his wife live on the radio is as good as it gets for me. She doesn't hem or haw, told it straight. It just has that ring of truth. No funny pauses, nothing changes with the story from the first interview I heard. Just the second one was longer more extensive.
Mountainman38
Member
I'm pretty sure my itty bitty LCP wouldn't look nearly as impressive as my full size Glock, if I had to present it in self defense.
- Status
Similar threads
