View Poll Results: Which type of carrier are you?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • I protect myself and my family, no one else.

    15 38.46%
  • I feel it's my duty to protect my fellow man from evil, no matter what.

    4 10.26%
  • Not sure. It's subjective.

    20 51.28%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 123

Thread: Which type of carrier are you and why?

  1. #1
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139

    Which type of carrier are you and why?

    I have noticed a dichotomy which exists among us. There are many of us who, in a self-defense situation, protect ourselves and no others. This is understandable. There are others, however, who either feel responsibility to protect others or feel the need to eliminate deadly threats.

    Which one are you and why?

    I am one of those who feels the responsibility to protect others, not just myself. I feel as if carriers, especially OCers, are entrusted by our society with this responsibility, and that carriers are almost (but not literally) deputized in a way - to protect society from evil. In Virginia, if I witness a violent felony, I have the authority to perform a citizen's arrest and I also have the authority to use deadly force if necessary to stop the threat. Now I'm not talking about being a rogue or a vigilante. I'm talking about operating under the constraints of the law.

    It almost seems to be this way on purpose. Maybe not all states are this way. Then again not all states are like Virginia, and Virginians are a special type of people.

    Just wanted to get these thoughts out there and thought it could make for some decent discussion.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    I entrust no one with my responsibility.

    Responsibility is a unique concept.
    You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished.
    You may delegate it, but it is still with you.
    If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion,
    or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else.
    Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong,
    then you have never had anyone really responsible.
    ― Hyman G. Rickover
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471
    Family first, everybody else second (including me). Rule #1 is my wife and kid survive. Rule #2 is I survive. Rule #3 is if I can engage without violating the first two rules, then I may do so.

    Something happens, I'm moving my family to an exit (or path of least resistance out of the area), and if any threat prohibits me from moving them out then they're getting dealt with. Not really interested in going back to face danger if I can avoid it, best way to survive a gun fight is to never get into one. I feel little to no duty to protect those who won't take that duty upon themselves.
    Last edited by jfrey123; 01-15-2015 at 06:14 PM.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by jfrey123 View Post
    Family first, everybody else second (including me). Rule #1 is my wife and kid survive. Rule #2 is I survive. Rule #3 is if I can engage without violating the first two rules, then I may do so.

    Something happens, I'm moving my family to an exit (or path of least resistance out of the area), and if any threat prohibits me from moving them out then they're getting dealt with. Not really interested in going back to face danger if I can avoid it, best way to survive a gun fight is to never get into one. I feel little to no duty to protect those who won't take that duty upon themselves.
    +1

    And I certainly don't feel any need to expose myself to potential prison or bankruptcy if in the course of trying to protect someone else I make a mistake.

    To save the life of my family or myself, I may have to risk the injustices of an imperfect court system. I am loathe to take on that risk on behalf of others who enjoy the same opportunity to prepare as I have had and chosen not to do so.

    If I shelter in place and 10 innocent strangers want to huddle behind me, fine. If they want to follow me out the door as I escape with my family, great. But I'm defending my family and self. Any benefit the strangers derive is incidental and unintentional. I'd like to help others, and I do in many cases. But the use of deadly force is most extreme and requires a special set of rules. I don't get qualified immunity for having good intentions.


    Charles

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Frozen Tundra, , USA
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by jfrey123 View Post
    Family first, everybody else second (including me). Rule #1 is my wife and kid survive. Rule #2 is I survive. Rule #3 is if I can engage without violating the first two rules, then I may do so.

    Something happens, I'm moving my family to an exit (or path of least resistance out of the area), and if any threat prohibits me from moving them out then they're getting dealt with. Not really interested in going back to face danger if I can avoid it, best way to survive a gun fight is to never get into one. I feel little to no duty to protect those who won't take that duty upon themselves.
    +2

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I put 3 subjective. Only because 2 had the word "duty" in it. I don't feel its my duty, but feel its my natural inclination to protect others and not sit by and let someone come to harm when I could have prevented it.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    It is my RESPONSIBILITY to protect myself and mine. It is my OPTION, that I would like to hope I can exercise safely, to help those who are also hopefully well equipped to help themselves and not just counting on others to save them.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  8. #8
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    I will defend myself and family.

    I will assuredly NOT engage in a deadly force confrontation unless I have clear and undebatable knowledge of the situation, i.e., who the "bad guy" is -- a situation which is almost impossible to achieve.

    I remember a situation in (IIRC) Virginia Beach where an armed citizen at a traffic stop sees someone being pursued by a person dressed in civilian clothes, carrying a firearm. Being a Good Samaritan, he exits his car and accosts the firearms carrier. Moments later, a LEO pulls up and tries to assess what she sees, cannot immediately determine who is who. Seeing the LEO arrive, the GS quickly gets back in his car and leaves. Turns out that the pursuer was either security or LEO in plain clothes chasing a shoplifter. (Some of these details may not be accurate, old memory here.)

    The point is, that incident could have ended tragically for one or more of the participants simply based on the confusion of who was the "bad guy." There is so much ambiguity and misperception on the part of the observer that it would be foolish, IMO, to employ deadly force unless MY life or the life of my family members was in direct risk of death or grievous bodily injury.
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  9. #9
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    About having a responsibility to protect other people just because I carry a gun..... often referred to by some folks as being some kind of "sheepdog" responsible for protecting the flock........

    I am not a sheep for I do not mill around with the flock with my attention on fitting in with the flock.

    I am not a wolf for I do not prey on the sheep.

    I am not a sheepdog for I do not have the responsibility to protect the sheep... nor do I have any desire to fight the wolf.

    I am a stray dog... I am warily friendly to the sheep and I avoid the wolf as I fend for myself yet I will fiercely fight to protect those I love... from both wolf and sheep.

    That said... I don't like using the word "sheep" because it is derogatory to people who need to be educated that they too can defend from the "wolf".

    The word "wolf" is an accurate term for predatory criminals so I have no problem with that one.

    And the word "sheepdog" sounds so nice... to be someone who protects the weak and innocent... but the truth is... it is not my job or responsibility to protect other citizens just because I carry a gun. I can choose to protect other citizens because of my individual morals and ethics... but I am not obligated to... it still isn't my job or responsibility... hence I am not a "sheepdog".

    I am of the opinion that if folks want to be protected they should not rely on someone else to put their lives, their livelihood, and their family's future on the line but should go and get their own gun.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  10. #10
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    I believe that some may have that duty, but perhaps not all. I don't believe that merely carrying a gun obligates you with that duty.

    I don't believe that someone should necessarily have a claim against you for not protecting them. On the other hand, I believe God might judge you for choosing not to intervene if it's within your power to do so.

    Hopefully this makes sense. The duty could exist on different levels. On a legal level, I don't believe a duty exists, and I don't believe any positive right exists that someone can demand of you that you protect them. On a moral level, though, there may very well be a duty, in certain circumstances. You may find that there's no direct consequence here on this earth for choosing to ignore that duty. I guess we each have to look to our consciences.
    Advocate freedom please

  11. #11
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    I believe that some may have that duty, but perhaps not all. I don't believe that merely carrying a gun obligates you with that duty.

    I don't believe that someone should necessarily have a claim against you for not protecting them. On the other hand, I believe God might judge you for choosing not to intervene if it's within your power to do so.

    Hopefully this makes sense. The duty could exist on different levels. On a legal level, I don't believe a duty exists, and I don't believe any positive right exists that someone can demand of you that you protect them. On a moral level, though, there may very well be a duty, in certain circumstances. You may find that there's no direct consequence here on this earth for choosing to ignore that duty. I guess we each have to look to our consciences.
    Well said. I suppose I should have clarified "moral duty" instead of "legal duty."

    Thanks for the honest answers guys!
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  12. #12
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Didn't vote, the "I carry and act in accordance with the law" was not one of the choices. Nothing against the poll choices.

    MO statutes (RSMo 563) have a "defense of others", a "defense of property", and a "accident" statute. We also have a "private person use of force to make arrest" (directed to do so by a cop) statute.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  13. #13
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    The sad fact is at least half of the people out there don't want me to be able to carry (arguable, numbers vary, no cite).
    If I'm in a situation in public where there is a crime taking place I would probably not get involved if I could hide or something. At least that is the plan. If I saw someone actually start executing people I'm not sure I could standby and let it happen. One thing I do know. When I'm out in public I'm surrounded on all sides by people that want to take my rights away and would probably condemn me as a "gun nut". I feel no obligation to protect them.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  14. #14
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    I feel like a lot of that is fear driven on the part of the non-gun owner, twoskinsonemanns. Different people have different natures. For some, the nature is to protect. For some the nature is to flee. For some the nature is to disconnect oneself from reality for the sake of imaginary comfort. There's not a doubt in my mind that most people's nature is to survive. I'll bet a significant portion of the people against OC would gladly show gratitude in the event that their life was spared because of another person with a gun.

    The anti crowd over-simplifies their logic to create an illusory reality by which they judge every day events. I don't think they should die because of that choice, I just think it's stupid. Then again, I do believe in social Darwinism to an extent. I also don't believe it takes someone being a commissioned or other type of officer to live like one and fulfill a civic duty to protect his fellow man from evil and assume a role of leadership.

    It's not the individuals that I wish to protect, it's humanity in general and the idea of peace and liberty.

    Yes it is the job of the police to perform certain civic responsibilities. That is their purpose as contracted by the state. Powers are granted to citizens in certain instances though, and I honestly can't justify my criticisms for police tactics without taking some sort of action myself and assuming some semblance of responsibility for my community, even if that means advocating more effective police accountability.

    I never really considered myself a collectivist but I've never considered myself an individualist per se either.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  15. #15
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    There should be a polling option along the lines of; "I don't need an excuse/reason to carry." In which case, that would be my vote.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  16. #16
    Regular Member SovereigntyOrDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Coeur D Alene, Idaho
    Posts
    430
    I didn't like the choices so I did not vote. If there was a choice to protect my family first then if possible take out a threat. I would chose that option. If folks chose to not be prepared, I do not feel any "duty" to "save" them.

    I like what George Washington & Thomas Jefferson said on the subject:

    "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
    George Washington
    First President of the United States

    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; "
    Thomas Jefferson
    "Nullification is the rightful remedy" Thomas Jefferson
    http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter...-preservation/

    "Constitutional Carry is not an oxymoron"
    A Sovereign

    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." Thomas Jefferson

  17. #17
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereigntyOrDeath View Post
    I didn't like the choices so I did not vote. If there was a choice to protect my family first then if possible take out a threat.
    Perhaps you missed the option for "I'd save my family and no one else."

    The poll answers are in regards to who you would protect. I see no mention of "stopping a threat" in the poll question at all, only in my personal thoughts.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  18. #18
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    There should be a polling option along the lines of; "I don't need an excuse/reason to carry." In which case, that would be my vote.
    I get what you are saying, but you either carry to protect yourself and family or to protect the aforementioned including others as well. Unless you carry for a third suicidal reason of "you think guns are pretty" and have no intention of using them defensively even when attacked, in which case you did the right thing by not voting.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  19. #19
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by The Truth View Post
    I feel like a lot of that is fear driven on the part of the non-gun owner, twoskinsonemanns. Different people have different natures. For some, the nature is to protect. For some the nature is to flee. For some the nature is to disconnect oneself from reality for the sake of imaginary comfort. There's not a doubt in my mind that most people's nature is to survive. I'll bet a significant portion of the people against OC would gladly show gratitude in the event that their life was spared because of another person with a gun.

    The anti crowd over-simplifies their logic to create an illusory reality by which they judge every day events. I don't think they should die because of that choice, I just think it's stupid. Then again, I do believe in social Darwinism to an extent. I also don't believe it takes someone being a commissioned or other type of officer to live like one and fulfill a civic duty to protect his fellow man from evil and assume a role of leadership.

    It's not the individuals that I wish to protect, it's humanity in general and the idea of peace and liberty.

    Yes it is the job of the police to perform certain civic responsibilities. That is their purpose as contracted by the state. Powers are granted to citizens in certain instances though, and I honestly can't justify my criticisms for police tactics without taking some sort of action myself and assuming some semblance of responsibility for my community, even if that means advocating more effective police accountability.

    I never really considered myself a collectivist but I've never considered myself an individualist per se either.
    I admire you Truth. As seen in countless vids a shot or two even long distance behind cover can send a crook reeling for an escape...
    I personally won't be the one doing it unless I or my family is in danger... not until society earns it by ceasing their persecution of their would be saviors.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  20. #20
    Regular Member SovereigntyOrDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Coeur D Alene, Idaho
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by The Truth View Post
    Perhaps you missed the option for "I'd save my family and no one else."

    The poll answers are in regards to who you would protect. I see no mention of "stopping a threat" in the poll question at all, only in my personal thoughts.
    I didn't like that option as I said originally. I assumed that if someone needed protecting, there would be a threat.

    Anyone who has not been in a gun fight is a liar, if they claim they will shoot at another human being imo. Until one is in that situation, one does not know for sure what they would do. Keyboard commandos included.

    Strange interpretation of my original post, but I guess that's how the cookie crumbles around here.
    "Nullification is the rightful remedy" Thomas Jefferson
    http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter...-preservation/

    "Constitutional Carry is not an oxymoron"
    A Sovereign

    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." Thomas Jefferson

  21. #21
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereigntyOrDeath View Post
    I didn't like the choices so I did not vote. If there was a choice to protect my family first then if possible take out a threat. I would chose that option. If folks chose to not be prepared, I do not feel any "duty" to "save" them.
    You said that you would choose the option to "protect my family first then if possible take out a threat."

    Option number one states that "I would protect my family, no one else."

    The premise of the poll is to ascertain whether or not you were interested in protecting strangers. There's really nothing much more to it. The poll question also assumes that there is a self-defense situation, which would obviously mean there is a threat. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that "you didn't like the choices," when one of the choices seems to be exactly what you would do, it just doesn't explicitly state "take out the threat" after you "protect your family."

    1) What would one do to a threat if it threatened one's family, and furthermore, 2) what would it be called in regards to your family once you "did whatever you did?"

    Answers:

    1) "Stop" 2) "Protect"

    Quote Originally Posted by SovereigntyOrDeath View Post
    I didn't like that option as I said originally. I assumed that if someone needed protecting, there would be a threat.
    See: above.

    Anyone who has not been in a gun fight is a liar, if they claim they will shoot at another human being imo. Until one is in that situation, one does not know for sure what they would do. Keyboard commandos included.
    It's a bit of a slippery slope for me to genuinely respond to this online. I don't want this thread to turn into chest thumping and whatnot.

    Strange interpretation of my original post, but I guess that's how the cookie crumbles around here.
    I think I interpreted your post exactly how you intended. I am trying to figure out the disconnect between how you feel and the poll answers. I feel as if I made Option 1 specifically for people such as yourself.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereigntyOrDeath View Post
    I didn't like that option as I said originally. I assumed that if someone needed protecting, there would be a threat.

    Anyone who has not been in a gun fight is a liar, if they claim they will shoot at another human being imo. Until one is in that situation, one does not know for sure what they would do. Keyboard commandos included.

    Strange interpretation of my original post, but I guess that's how the cookie crumbles around here.
    Best post by far on the topic.
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  23. #23
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by SovereigntyOrDeath View Post
    Anyone who has not been in a gun fight is a liar, if they claim they will shoot at another human being imo.
    What a load of regurgitated hogwash. I have trained and trained and have been in one situation where I had the finger on the trigger. I have never shot a human being but I guarantee I would without hesitation. Your dribble is nothing but psychobabble you saw on the Dr Phil show.
    Last edited by twoskinsonemanns; 01-17-2015 at 04:43 PM.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  24. #24
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    What a load of regurgitated hogwash. I have trained and trained and have been in one situation where I had the finger on the trigger. I have never shot a human being but I guarantee I would without hesitation. Your dribble is nothing but psychobabble you saw on the Dr Phil show.
    LAC have proved over and over again that his statement just is not true.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    What a load of regurgitated hogwash. I have trained and trained and have been in one situation where I had the finger on the trigger. I have never shot a human being but I guarantee I would without hesitation. Your dribble is nothing but psychobabble you saw on the Dr Phil show.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    LAC have proved over and over again that his statement just is not true.
    Like the recent pizza delivery person who protected herself from an armed assailant.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •