Should we help those who do not want to help themselves?

What does a "anti-gunner" look like? I have not been able to pick one out of a crowd. But this is a separate question and unrelated to the OP.

It is important that we follow the law of our respective states if the question of defending another is raised.

Use of force in defense of persons.

563.031. 1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subsection 2 of this section, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such force to be necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful force by such other person, unless:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM

Click to expand...

Once you are very familiar with the law, then the question is made easier from a legal standpoint.....for me anyway.

OC for ME said:

What does a "anti-gunner" look like? I have not been able to pick one out of a crowd. But this is a separate question and unrelated to the OP.

It is important that we follow the law of our respective states if the question of defending another is raised.

Once you are very familiar with the law, then the question is made easier from a legal standpoint.....for me anyway.

Click to expand...

And what comes after the

unless: ?

Click to expand...

"Unless" is where the exceptions come into play, and the exceptions are what change the rule. Pax...

OC for ME said:

SNIP What does a "anti-gunner" look like? I have not been able to pick one out of a crowd.

Click to expand...

Oh, that's easy. They're the one's with their faces all screwed into a frown when an OCer is near.

Gil223 said:

And what comes after the "Unless" is where the exceptions come into play, and the exceptions are what change the rule. Pax...

Click to expand...

I provided a link to the statute.....go read what the "unless" refers to.

I could be mistaken, but given the few accounts of self defense I have heard of here in Missouri, LE is a advocate for the citizen who claims self defense under RSMo 563.031.....unless they discover evidence to the otherwise. Missouri, and thus Missouri LE seem to be citizen friendly in a self defense situation.

Citizen said:

Oh, that's easy. They're the one's with their faces all screwed into a frown when an OCer is near.

Click to expand...

I shudda seen that one coming.....dang!

OC for ME said:

I provided a link to the statute.....go read what the "unless" refers to.

Click to expand...

I did that. Luckily, I don't live in Missouri - land of the exception to the exception:

563.031.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subsection 2 of this section, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such force to be necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful force by such other person, unless: (blah,blah,blah)

Click to expand...

and then we have MRS 563.031.2:

2. A person may not use deadly force upon another person under the circumstances specified in subsection 1 of this section unless:

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything contained in MRS 563.031.2, I just find the making of exceptions to exceptions laughably ironic, and I'm fairly sure it would be seen as a bit confusing by some folks (those who are easily confused by words with more than two syllables, Chinese restaurant menus, and traffic circles). Pax...

Gil223 said:

I did that. Luckily, I don't live in Missouri - land of the exception to the exception:
and then we have MRS 563.031.2:
I don't disagree with anything contained in MRS 563.031.2, I just find the making of exceptions to exceptions laughably ironic, and I'm fairly sure it would be seen as a bit confusing by some folks (those who are easily confused by words with more than two syllables, Chinese restaurant menus, and traffic circles). Pax...

Click to expand...

The few remaining grey cells I have were able to cipher all that legal mumbo-jumbo. It, the RSMo, seems pretty simple.....to a simple fella like me.

Heck, even if your started "it" and get your backside handed to you, then high-tail it outta there yelling "I quite, leave me alone", you now can defend yourself from the dude who wants to continue to kick your backside.

Situational Awareness is The Key

:idea: >>> * Situational Awareness * <<< ; Involves, being observant, scanning and evaluating our surroundings, accepting without question that danger can come suddenly and with no warning whatsoever, and recognizing the potential for danger as it approaches, while developing a plan to either defend against the danger, or to just get away from the danger as quickly as possible, without wasting time asking oneself, “Is this really happening?”. Because by the time you are busy asking yourself that question, the answer is already “Yes.”

My Signature states, "I Care, therefore, I Carry. & "Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for a friend." John 15:13

#1 is Protect My Family, Friends in close proximity & "Others" (= Women & Children 1st type of thang) provided the opportunity presents itself in a Safe & Rational manner.

So, having stated all of that, I'll decide the answer to ... **"Should we help those who do not want to help themselves?"** ... IF & When the Time (Hopefully NOT) ever comes.

Being a Plan *A* , *B* & *C* kind of guy ,,,

Plan *A* = STAY ALIVE ! (Most Important) :exclaim:
Plan *B* = Do the Right Thing. ( If "Others" benefit from my Plan *A*, good for them)
Plan *C* = Repeat Plans * A & B * until Ultimate Goal (removal of Self &/or cause of Threat) is Accomplished. (Don't count yer' Chicks afore they's hatched !)

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Thomas Jefferson, Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." ... Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

Peace & RKBA 4ever !

This question is very fluid - to me it boils down to two words: "It depends." Obviously if I am in an area where there are others in my immediate vicinity, acting to defend myself will subsequently be acting to defend those around me. How close is the BG, what are the risks to others by intervening, line of sight, should I even be involved? If I heard something go bump in the night while out in public I certainly wouldn't go "look for trouble."

Like many have said, I carry to protect me and mine. I am under no obligation to help those around me, but the circumstances may create a situation where I may directly or indirectly do just that. If an incident is close (within my line of sight and inside, say 100 feet) and I am not directly involved, I MAY intervene because my safety COULD be threatened.

At the very least I have no objections to being a good witness - but the downside to that is someone could wind up burying a family member.