Would you Intervene?

[Diesle]

ahenry,

Do you have a family of your own that your responsible to?

If you don’t, I understand your willingness, and frankly what appears like eagerness, to start shooting.

If you do, Id sure like to hear what your wife thinks about your chivalry....

Nonetheless, thanks for your inputs.


Diesle

 

[Diesle]

Ummm, I am making an attempt. im reading your posts arent I...?

Is your blood pressure an issue for you? (dont answer that...)

Diesle

 

[El Tejon]

ahenry, I'm citing authority of those who know, not the silly bromides of gun shop commandos. Education is key. As Bismarck said, I prefer learn by the mistakes of others.

The Clint Smith quotation (misquoting "Unforgiven") is a correct restatement of the duty to strangers--none. Why anyone would be intent on risking everything, including hurting innocents, when he is in no danger and has no duty to do so is beyond me. "Doing something right" is subjective and can lead to prison, bankruptcy, inter alia.

If you decide not to intrevene, then there are no consequences. If you decide to intrevene and it turns out that you have shot innocents or police officers, there will be dire consequences.

I have no need and have no chip on my shoulder to act rashly to "prove something", "act like a man" or to be a hero. I fail to see how protecting myself by choosing not to intrevene renders me incapable of defending myself if I were to be attacked. One carries a firearm to protect himself, not to become Batman.

 

[P95Carry]

Wow .... has this thread gained some momentum!!!

Much that has been discussed in fact seems to revolve around essentially moralistic issues ... repurcussions of various types etc .. thru action or inaction.

Ultimately I think every one of us would perforce, have to make our best decision ... at the time. Detached analysis of a scenario can only go so far .. because in part of the severe ''what if'' factor.

I would hope none of us does meet with this situation but .. I feel we would all, in our own ways, wish at least to ''do the right thing'' as we see it ...... a split second decision has to be made ... not necessarily helped by an OD of adrenalin ...... and then we act or we turn away.

I shall certainly have this subject in mind a good while yet . it has opened quite a can of worms... usefully I would say.

 

[ahenry]

Do you have a family of your own that your responsible to?

Sort of.

If you don’t, I understand your willingness, and frankly what appears like eagerness, to start shooting.

Frankly, you’re way off base in your interpretation. How many people in this one thread have said they would intervene? You think they all are eager to shoot somebody, or just me because I have defended the reasoning behind the choice?

If you do, Id sure like to hear what your wife thinks about your chivalry....

I assume this applies to the family question. I have spoken with my fiancé about this as well as my mother, my grandmothers, my future mother in law and other various females I know to see what they think about this. So far not one thinks I should not intervene. As far as my future wife is concerned, to paraphrase her words, she wouldn’t particularly want me to get myself shot but she would probably think less of me as a man if I wasn’t willing to try and help somebody that needed my help.

Is your blood pressure an issue for you? (dont answer that...)

Not sure how that applies, but I’ll answer despite your suggestion that I not. I have excellent blood pressure and I am in excellent health. I appreciate your concern though.

 

[Diesle]

Understood. And, good luck.

Diesle

 

[Powderman]

Ho-kay, folks!

WHY are there people here attempting to put monetary value on human life?

You know, folks, I might be somewhat simplistic in my views and beliefs, but I believe that there is ample case law that proves:

1. If you, as a "reasonable person" believe that another person is in imminent danger of loss of life, or maiming, or

2. Is in imminent danger of becoming a victim of a crime that could result in the loss of life, or maiming (as in, rape, arson, or kidnap)

that the use of deadly force will be justified.

Also, for the still weak at heart, be advised that many states are now passing laws that grant immunity from civil prosecution for justifiable homicides done under these circumstances.

Even if there were not, though, how can anyone--ANYONE--say that they could be an armed witness to the crime described above--and do nothing?

Some have said that "it might be cops" Bull !!!

If a person is being arrested and/or detained, you can bet that the person will be in handcuffs, not being dragged out kicking and screaming. Also, there will be at least one car with some type of official plates around.

Still in doubt?? A quick 911 call on your trusty cell phone will dispel all doubt.

"It might be a cult-buster"

HORSE .

I don't care if it is!!! It's still forcibly removing a person against their will, which is called KIDNAPPING.

And for all of you who STILL would not intervene, just do this.

In the scenario listed above, think about it. Play the movie in your head. Do you have it going? Good. Make it VIVID! In COLOR!

Now, put the face of YOUR wife, or YOUR daughter on the woman being dragged away.

Finally, insert a bystander, almost at arms length, holding a gun--but doing NOTHING. Pretty picture, huh?

IF YOU USE SOME EXCUSE SUCH AS LIABILITY OR FINANCIAL LOSS TO PREVENT THIS CRIME FROM OCCURRING, YOU ARE NOT A MAN--OR WOMAN. YOU ARE A SHEEP. TURN IN YOUR CCW AND GIVE YOUR GUNS AWAY. YOU DON'T DESERVE THEM.

Oh, and by the way, for all you "macho" guys that will go shoot IDPA, or USPSA, or IPSC, carry any gun that has "combat" in the name, or use any ammo but ball ammo, if you will NOT respond in this scenario, turn in your gonads. You don't deserve them.

Flame on, folks! I've got asbestos drawers on.

 

[El Tejon]

ahenry, you're getting married? You are a brave man!

 

[Felonious Monk]

ahenry--

And lastly, I (and apparently others here as well) value doing what is right above potential personal risks. Before you go off half-cocked, I’m not suggesting somebody jump out and do something stupid. As Beren said, A man’s gotta know his limitations. Fine, if you think you don’t have the ability to accomplish anything at all and decide to just be a witness thats your choice (frankly if you think that then I’d suggest you sell your guns, buy a football helmet and look for somebody to come pad the walls of your house so you can live in safety).

You're my bud and all, but that's assuming too much, and implying that anybody else who doesn't agree with you totally is wrong. That's just hard-headed. If a situation shows itself (I'm in McDonald's, a guy walks in and pulls a gun on the cashier), that's cut and dried enough to put myself in harm's way to stop the threat with a bullet. No thought to my personal safety.

To imply that this is the same (cut and dried) is wrong, IMO.

 

[TracerSpies]

Wouldn't a responsible citizen be obligated? Out here we call it retroactive birth control. I think it would be really interesting to break down the responses geographically! Too bad some folks don't link themselves to the area they live.

 

[ahenry]

If you decide not to intrevene, then there are no consequences. If you decide to intrevene and it turns out that you have shot innocents or police officers, there will be dire consequences.

Actually the only consequences that are for sure are the emotional ones (I redirect your attention to the drugstore clerk mentioned previously). While those would be severe to be sure, what would be the emotional consequences of doing nothing while an innocent person is raped and killed? Apparently, for some, not as severe as the potential downside risks.

I have no need and have no chip on my shoulder to act rashly to "prove something", "act like a man" or to be a hero...One carries a firearm to protect himself, not to become Batman.

I don’t have a chip on my shoulder to act rashly either, despite your attempt to imply otherwise.

I fail to see how protecting myself by choosing not to intrevene renders me incapable of defending myself if I were to be attacked.

It doesn’t make you incapable, it makes you somewhat spineless, if I may be frank. No offence meant, but to my way of thinking a “man†that is afraid to help another person in need (especially a woman) simply because of the possibility that there might be some adverse consequences (an as yet unproven assertion, BTW), is not much of a man. I really mean no offence, and I’m sure you are a good guy, I just have a particular view of “what makes a man†and running the other way ain’t it.


Felonious Monk,

You're my bud and all, but that's assuming too much, and implying that anybody else who doesn't agree with you totally is wrong. That's just hard-headed.

Didn’t mean to imply that. As I told el tejon before, its his choice to make. I don't fault a person for deciding to do everything they think they are able to do (even if its less than I would choose to do). The key words being "everything they think they are able". Each person has to decide for themselves what they are capable of. No problem there. The only problem I have is with people either a) saying to intervene is wrong and sets one up for a unproven risk, or b) choosing not to act because they think they might suffer some risks, even though the victim will suffer.

 

[B9mmHP]

I did not vote, because if I voted.

#1. No I'm not my brothers keeper.
Well no I'm not my brothers' keeper , but sometimes my brother can get into things that he can't foresee or have any control over. So should I try to change my brothers' fate or just say it is his destiny and live with my decision? No is my answer.

#2. Yes, but only if it appears the victim will be harmed.
It seems to me, according to the scenario that she is being harmed by the sound of her scream, being dragged out by some perpetrator with an armed gunman backing him up, and the gunshot I just heard. So it would be logical that she was in immediate danger.

#3. Yes, I owe it to society.
No, I owe nothing to society, I owe nothing to the victim either, but I do owe it to my family and myself and friends that may be the next victims of the perpetrators or some others like them.

I don't recall anyone mentioning anything about hearing a gunshot, as the scenario states there was a gun shot. That should dispel some of the problems that some here have about shooting the preps.

Yes, I would shoot. I would give a warning to drop your gun, while keeping my gun sighted on the one with the handgun, if he turned to face me with the gun, or not, depending on what he did. He would get a double or triple tap or more, depending on what the other prep was doing. No I would not run after the battle was over, because I line in Texas.

I also have a right and obligation to defend others that may not be in a position not to do so, even if it is the ones that would not do so themselves.

Edit: Well, someone did mention the gun shot.

 

[El Tejon]

ahenry, no offense taken, ever. It's just the Errornet and we're all on the same side. Put it in with heat!

How does one know what will happen to the clerk? Don't know, don't shoot. Who knows what's going on? Don't know, don't shoot. I'm not in danger regardless, don't shoot.

Spineless? No, just not foolhardy. I do not equate bravery with recklessness. What good would anyone be to their wife if in prison or broke?

Why fight a battle you do not have to? Jumping into a Problem #1 that you do not have to be in is setting yourself up for all kinds of potential trouble after the fact.

 

[spacemanspiff]

how is it that the majority who voted in this poll say they would intervene, but in past discussions, the majority would not intervene in a domestic violence situation?

theoretically, maybe the female clerk is one of the masked mens sig other? so are you intervening because you think its a robbery/kidnapping? or because human life is threatened and no matter what the situation is, your conscience would plague you if you didnt intervene?

 

[Beer for my Horses]

For those of you (us) willing to intervene/and shoot, you'd better be prepared to take a head shot on the BG with the gun on the hostage, not shoot to COM, or double tap as has been suggested. A COM shot, even if directly to the heart, leaves the BG with enough blood pressure for meaningful action for up to 15 seconds or more. . . . enough time for him to kill the hostage and get off a couple shots at you before bleeding out. The only instantaneous stopper is a shot that penetrates the brain, preferably the medulla omblongata. Hostage interventions are very risky, and whether a police officer or good samaritan, you've got to be prepared with how to deal with it effectively. If you don't feel confident with your ability to make a head shot under the stress of the situation, you're best to stay behind cover and call 911.

 

[ahenry]

I do not equate bravery with recklessness. What good would anyone be to their wife if in prison or broke?

Allow me to once more ask you to, show me the proof!

 

[vi9er]

First off, those who are saying they wouldn't intervene are calling those who would trigger happy. I don't think most of us are going in shooting, but, and thats a BIG but, I would do everything in my power to prevent an innocent from being harmed. You say she should arm herself, what if she WAS armed, and ski mask guy walked in behind her and stuck the barrel of a .38 in her ear. She is now beyond drawing! as wise man in Tejas sez "dont' draw on a drawn gun" I would not rush in firing, but I would certainly yell for them to stop. If it was a cop, you'd know it real quick, as they would scream that they are cops. If they raise the gun without ID'ing themselves, they probably are up to no good. In which case, i get to let my trigger happy finger enjoy itself

 

[El Tejon]

ahenry, what is it that you demand proof of? And what will you say when I show you proof?

 

[DeltaElite]

Wait, make that a NO, I might drop my donut.

 

[Atticus]

'The only instantaneous stopper is a shot that penetrates the brain, preferably the medulla omblongata. "

Is that right? I assume the perp is spineless and heartless. Sound like some folks here.

 

[B9mmHP]

Beer, if your comment was ment for me about the double tap, you can be assured that if I was close enough, it would be to the head, that is why I said it would be, double tap etc.
Close enough for me for a head shot with a pistol would be about 15 ft, but I would still do a double tap, and more if needed. And yes, before you ask, I would look to see if anyone was in danger behind the perps, before I shoot.

El Tejon, you write like KS Freeman from TFL, might you be the same?

 

[PDshooter]

Yes! I would intervene. But if I layed out the BG, and I know he's already DOA.

I "ANT" hanging around ! for the the COPS !
I'm history!

 

[Diesle]

What Ive found to be absolutely silly about this entire thread is that, generally speaking, most of you seem to think that you’ll be in full control of not only the situation, but of your own facilities at all times as this situation unfolds. Ridicules on at least one of those counts, if not both... And, I got $10 that says more than half the people confronted with this type of action begin their 'involvement' by wetting themselves.

I’m gonna put 2 to his head.... or more. Oh, are you...? Ludicrous!

You know when my gun comes out? When I feel like my life, or the life of someone I love is about to END. Thats about as clear and absolute I can be on the matter. If the situation does not meet that simple criteria, I take cover. I dont feel that this position makes me any less of a man as my morals dictate that I keep myself out of harms way so that I can be around as long as possible for my children and wife. I resent the suggestion and will gladly demonstrate my manhood if and when so challenged.

Good luck cowboys,

Diesle

 

[DeltaElite]

I find this thread funny too.
It's funny how many people are pro-freedom, but unwilling to help someone else maintain their freedom.
Talk is cheap.

The scenario is horribly incomplete. There is so much that can only be reasoned at the time of the incident.
If my family is with me, then I won't act, because I won't risk them for anyone.

These threads are about as useful as asking what play you would call to win the Superbowl. I'd run a post pattern.

Oops, this thread scared me so bad I wet myself.

 

[Edward429451]

<What would my wife think?>

OK I asked my wife. Laid out the scenario for her and what would she want me to do and what would she do, respectivly.

She said it'd be terrible to do nothing and made the point that taking the license number would be useless cause it does nothing to help right now and car could even be stolen so they may never even find the guys. She also said that I should not shoot without a verbal challenge first. Cover the gunman, challenge him to drop weapon, shoot if he does anything but drop the weapon.

She said she'd challenge him first also.

Its good that some voice that they'd do nothing. It lets us know who wouldnt back us up if we were hangin out together!

El Tejon, would you stop and change a flat tire for a lady if you knew it would make you late to your anniversary dinner with your wife?