Unwilling to pull the trigger.

Status
Not open for further replies.
My wife is one of those people.
I've taken her to the range.
We have 2 handguns in the house hidden, and loaded magazines hidden very near them.
I think if someone broke in she'd try to get out the back door and run, or hide in the bathroom and call the cops.
She thinks Guns are useless but is OK with me having them... sort of.
She thinks hunting is stupid, and self defense is calling the cops.
Makes me sad. Hate to think anything would happen to her, but as she says.... you can only control yourself, and sometimes you have to accept the fact that you can't control other people's choices.
sad.
 
THR?

I'm really sorry to hear about your friend's ordeal. The comments about her being unfit to survive are, in my opinion, insensitive and misguided. Those comments also don't seem very High Road.

Your friend made a reasonable decision under extreme duress. She had never fired the weapon, and had zero physical or psychological defense training. Pulling the trigger is one thing; stopping an armed attacker is another. Those of us who have faced a knife know that it is no walk in the park even when holding a weapon.

With training, things might have turned out differently for your friend. Quite frankly, I'm a bit disappointed by some of the comments in this thread. I would expect THR members to be on her side. She needs training and encouragement, not criticism about her moral fiber.

Training changes everything. With training, for example, she might have shot the attacker in the knees, thereby following her beliefs while simultaneously refusing to succumb to the attacker's "beliefs". Or she might simply have shown herself to be less of a target. The attacker probably took one look at her stance and said, "she's never fired a gun in her life." Had she taken a strong, practiced stance, it might have been the attacker dropping his weapon.
 
As soon as i was 13 i had my first pistol. All though young at the time i made a peace with myself. I told myself, "If my life or someone else's life is in danger, i will help them by any means necessary. God has equipped me with a tool of life. I will practice with it, clean it, and if i have to, use it. If given the opportunity to save an innocent life by taking a guilty one, I will do so. No matter what."

Only when you have a mindset like that, should you decide to purchase a firearm for means of self-defense.
 
"If my life or someone else's life is in danger, i will help them by any means necessary. God has equipped me with a tool of life. I will practice with it, clean it, and if i have to, use it. If given the opportunity to save an innocent life by taking a guilty one, I will do so. No matter what."

very good
 
i know this to be true, not to this lady, but my mother in law. she had talked a couple of times about getting a pistol after her divorce. for protection. so one day when she came to visit, i loaded up my ruger mark 2 and took her and my wife out to the back 40. after me showing her how to handle the gun, i helped her get a grip on it, and told her to squeeze the trigger. she could not squeeze, or even yank it! my wife and i tried a couple more times, but then she got where she wouldnt even hold the gun. i told her to absoloutly forget about getting a gun because it would just give somebody else something to shoot her with. she said" what if i just point it at them"? i told her that was a very dangerous bluff. if they didn't buy it, they would take the gun from her and use it on her. she shut up about guns after that. i will never be able to understand how when confronted with great bodily harm, or death, somebody would just lay down and take it or die.
 
I would hate for someone to say that this is a case of "only the strong survive" or "the strong preying on the weak." I don't want to go all "hippie liberal" on here, but I don't really have a problem with someone who is reluctant to take a life. It seems as we get too many who are too quick to do so. I pray for her and only wish my wife would defend her life to the fullest.
 
Keep in mind...

She had (and has) the freedom of choice. Very sad what happened to her, but that is the price she paid for her choice, and if she didn't think about the results of that choice beforehand (and I mean well beforehand, not during the event), well, that was also a choice, and all choices have consequences.
 
While I do believe that "Life Is Sacred", I know that others with lesser intentions might not hold the idea that "MY life is sacred", so I can see how many in society are not able to pull that trigger, while others don't hesitate. Those who hold a sacred value of life, even that of those who would harm them, is so strong that it can, has and may cost them a terrible price. Or maybe it's not a "value of sacred life" after all.

We are all victims of our beliefs, our indoctrination, our natural order in a manner of speaking.

Fight or flight, posturing or freezing up, all commonly found in nature (you can each think of several examples of animals in the wild). They all come at some cost. Not right. Not wrong. Just... is.

Sometimes each works in a given situation. Other times, however... :(
 
A few years back a police officer in Dayton, Ohio expressed her reluctance to shoot a fellow human being; several times. That was not grounds for dismissing her from the academy. Unfortunately she had an opportunitiny to defend her life and that of another person while on duty. Instead she believed the perp would not harm her if she surrendered her weapon, which she did. He shot her anyways, paralyzing her. She died a few years later form the related wounds. Some people can not/will not take a life even in defense of their own. I wonder if maybe they project their morals onto the perp and feel they will not harm them if they are kind to them. Who knows? I think if you choose to be armed to defend yourself and those around you that you should check your mindset regularly and avow to not only to survive an encounter but to win it. Anything else will only make things worse.
 
Inherent . . . NOT! (Arfin)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
It's apparently inherent in their nature. (Winchester)

Uh, no.(Arfin)

It's a matter of indoctrination.

I respectfully disagree.In many cases it may be indoctrination but certainly not all.
Some humans are inherently defenseless and unable to fight back.My opinion is this lady is one of them.
Linda agrees.Thank you,Linda!We are in the minority on this issue.But I'm left handed so I'm used to that.
 
I stress this issue with anyone i "convert"
if you can not drop the hammer, you have no business owning a weapon for self defense as it WILL be used against you when the criminal over powers you.
females especially are prone to this. I even question my self int his regard as im not worried about the emotional aspect, more so legal and civil suits, not to mention the "homies posse" getting revenge against me and my family.
 
Listen to me...

There are two types of criminals:

1.) Career criminals who make it their livelihood to terrorize the innocent.

2.) Flat out psychotic/mental/"take others with me to the grave"/suicidal criminals who will end lives at a drop of a hat.

Unless your friend grasps these two thoughts, it'll be 3:00am again in a bad neighborhood.

I hate to hear stuff like that about someone you know.
 
1. I've seen it happen in training. In a FOF, one participant just couldn't pull the trigger under attack. It wasn't a panic freeze but just couldn't do it.

2. The various reasons why people can't act in face to face violence are fairly complex. There is a new book out on it:

Collins, author of the new book Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory (Princeton University Press), is not so naïve as to deny that the globe is drenched in blood. But he argues that to confront another human being and do him harm is far more psychologically difficult than most social scientists appreciate. "There is," he writes, "a palpable barrier to getting into a violent confrontation." And the resulting anxiety makes people lash out incompetently. Most people back down from fistfights after a bit of trash talking. And in war, more soldiers cower than attack the enemy effectively.

-------- I'm reading it now - 550 pages - looks at the SLA Marshall, Grossman, evolutionary behavior views, etc.

To denigrate the person is easy on the Internet as you don't see them face to face.
 
Even in war soldiers are often unwilling to pull the trigger. S.L.A. Marshall's famous study indicated that during WWII less than 20% of soldiers ever fired their rifle in combat. The majority indicated they simply were not willing to kill even when faced with imminent death themselves.
-
 
The Bible tells us that the taking of another's life is a sin; but I'm not
so sure that GOD wants us to stand a'round and be a victim~?

Actually it says murder is a sin not taking another life. There are several instances when killingis justified and defence of self and others are some of them.
 
At least I know my sister doesn't think a gun is a magic talisman and is willing to shoot to protect herself.
I think to some extent you're cutting the 1st woman short. She very well may have believed she could shoot someone in self defense as well. Most of us here probably believe we could as well. Actually being faced with that situation seems to give it more gravity than our imagination does.
 
That's to bad. She should have shot him and then gone to get counselling. This guy is only going to be encouraged by his success and WILL strike AGAIN. He is a menace to society and should be shot or hung.

And if we're going to be biblical about it the Bible says that there are three things that warrant the death penalty; Murder, Kidnapping and RAPE.

In a way she is hurting the women that fall victim to this man by not doing what is necessary and pulling trigger, there are others to think of besides herself.

I hope she can move on and lead a life.
 
Some people,even at the risk of their lives,simply can't pull the trigger.

Pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is not a "normal' or "natural' act. It is an act for which we must train ourselves mentally to be able to do if necessary. No training = brain freeze.
 
I'm sorry to hear about what happened to your friend.
I guess some just have a gentle nature that doesn't allow them to resist. Unfortunately, there are those who will see them as prey for that. I hope she doesn't find herself in that situation again.

Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with using force to defend myself or others.
I've done it before and I'd do it again.
I haven't always won and I have my share of scars and a permanent hump on my nose that keeps my glasses from sliding off, so I'll admit that I haven't always been the most successful fighter.
But I can tell you this:
Even when you don't win you can still keep your attacker from winning.
They look for a weak victim that they can dominate easily and take control of quickly. When you start fighting back that complicates things for them.
I've seen women fight each other and they can be downright ruthless. I'd imagine if those same women were to latch on to a certain part of the male anatomy during an attempted rape and start to squeeze and sink their fingernails in...
Well it would probably decrease their attacker's sex drive for a good long while.
I'd prefer that she use a .38 and permanently end the problem, but there is a lot to be said for just having the will to fight.

One final argument - people often quote Luke 22:36 as a reference for having a weapon.
I think this an incorrect interpretation, but if you look a little farther down at 22:38, the response is that the disciples didn't need to go buy a sword because they already had two.
There they were, traveling all over the place with Jesus, carrying weapons.
I'd imagine that Jesus, being who Jesus was, already knew that some of his followers were packing some iron.
He also apparently didn't require his followers to be disarmed.
Make what you will of it, but I don't think that Christianity and self defense are mutually exclusive.
 
The human brain has the capability when stressed beyond it's limit to slow down your perception of time to a near stop, this allows you time to react to the situation, you have time to observe your threat and take in the situation.

There is a scale of reaction that occurs with the data you just gained, if it equates the scenario with danger, then the first thing that happens is what is stored in your brain as a reaction to the stressful situation.

The first place your brain will try is what it has stored as reaction to imminent danger; this is in the center of your brain called the control center. Under normal circumstances it is fed information and relays it to the thought center for study, however in an emergency situation it switches control to the disaster center, which bypasses thought, and will engage automatically.

Your heart beats faster as biological chemicals kick in to throw you into overtime, your lungs are operating faster and the fight or flight response kicks in.

You have spent hours holding your arms in a certain position, articulating your hands and fingers to squeeze a trigger that is tied to an action of throwing mass downrange with lethal force, what you may not know is that every time you aim and pull you are reinforcing neural links that were created when you first shot your gun.

Back to yourself in the fight or flight response, your FOFR concludes that your hands are registering the same sensory information that is tied to 'the thing that goes bang and puts holes in other things' and without thought, without reason or consideration, after your control center has enough relevant data to identify the threat and has verified that you are holding a deadly weapon, it will send neurological impulses through the relevant neuron chains and you brain will make your body fire your gun without even bothering to consult you.

Ask any officer who has been involved in that kind of stressful situation, most don't even remember firing their guns, and often their weapons are empty after the encounter.

The OP's friend had never practiced those life saving tactics, never formed the neural links that equated to the life saving action of firing the gun in her hands, without those vital disaster center instinctual reactions to save her live the gun was nothing more than an expensive hunk of metal.

What happened in her mind? It sounds like her flight or fight response failed to come up with a viable response, she couldn't run away and she wasn't strong enough to fight back, so her brain did the only thing it could do, it returned control of function to the thought center. She froze when she realized where she was and what was happening, the BG gave her a reasonable option and her already stressed out mind, still set on survival, reasoned that it was the only available solution and promptly responded by bowing to the command given by the threat.

Conditioned to do so by indoctrination into an idea that she is somehow "morally superior" raped and beaten to someone who has the audacity to defend themselves with deadly force.

Score another one for Hitler's ideology
 
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman wrote a book called on "On Killing: The psychological cost of killing in war and society" on the condition people have to go through to pull the trigger and actually hit their target. what happened to her is really common according in this book. In World War II firing rates were around 15 to 20% and by vietnam firing rates were supposidly hovering around 95%. and a lot of it had to do with training. The use of pop up man like targets and reactionary targets along with a better understading of how leadership can affect firing rates.

In history a lot of people purposely missed their targets when they were squared off. Civil war figures show that only 1 or 2 people would be hit in every ten minutes of exchanged rifle fire and they would only be 40 or so feet apart. A lot of rounds were fired high intentional as a form of intimidation.

A lot of this is the reason why artillery and military sharpshooters and crew served weapons tend to make more kills. They have an advantage of distance and mechanical devices that grant a distance an escape from the idea of actually taking life.

So unfortantly what happened to your friend was the result of being told to submit to an aggressor her whole life most likely. And sadly with some training her situation could have been avoided (please understnad this is not in any way a criticism of your friend). Society is partially to blame with the way we socialize people. Im sorry to hear about her and I wish her the best in her recovery.
 
My philosophy,

Her indoctrination began more than the 40 years ago that Law Dog refers to.
Since the laws were given to Moses, we've been nit picking, the commandment says "Thou shall not commit murder." Somewhere the smarties turned that into "Thou shall not kill" which is completely different and as we see in the given example, highly injurious to the unwilling. This same obfuscation has been wielded on the basis of law, the Constitution. "They" would have us believe that "we the people" means only white men between the age of 18-45 who are part of a militia and that militia means the national guard. I feel resonance in my soul when I realize that not all people are willing to kill, if we were all sheepdogs, we'd have no sheep to protect from the wolves. My psyche goes beyond protecting myself and my family and I envision myself being the one to punch yon ruffian in the chops. I have several times interrupted physical confrontations and my wife believes it is this proclivity that will result in my demise. She also thinks that will happen because I use the car horn.:eek:
 
I don't think that Christianity and self defense are mutually exclusive.

This often comes up it, and was something that troubled me until I read this article [see link: http://www.corneredcat.com/Ethics/pacifism.aspx] by the most excellent Kathy Jackson on her most excellent website at "corneredcat.com."

The OP should direct his unfortunate friend to this website asap, and I recommend it for anyone who has not spent some time there, regardless of whether or not you are a Christian or a woman. The OP should also encourage (insist?) that his friend enroll immediately in a defensive firearm instruction class. It could save her life.
 
...after your control center has enogh relevant data to identify the threat and has verified that you are holding a deadly weapon, it will send neurological impulses through the relevant neuron chains and you brain will make your body fire your gun without even bothering to consult you.

GhostlyKarliion: Good description of what happens IF you are trained to react to threat with force.

I recently had the opportunity to work out on an interactive video trainer designed to allow students to "experience" shoot/no shoot scenarios. Having pre-determined that I would shoot if I saw a weapon, I was still amazed at the sensation of "slowed time" and the automatic reponse when the weapon was presented.

I would like to spend more time with this simulator, and would heartily recommend this kind of training to anyone to whom it is availble.
 
I can honestly say that during my time with the U.S. Army, and my tour in Viet Nam, I never discharged my issued firearm in anger (stark fear a few times, but that is another matter). In the intervening years (1969 to present) I have acquired a number of handguns, practiced at the local indoor range, and have become (to my mind) proficient to where muscle memory has been established. I have my state's conceal carry permit, and I pray that I never have to drop the hammer on another human being, but I am prepared to if the situation arises.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top