• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Shooting at IHOP Carson City Nv

W

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
coolusername2007 said:
Clearly its situation specific. But to be in a position to help and turn your back is pathetic.
Click to expand...
The armed citizen was protecting his business and his family. It was entirely his choice. Monday morning quarterbacking it does not make it "pathetic" by any stretch.


You weren't there, HE was. When YOU are the one there, YOU can do as YOU choose. If you act wrong (by OUR chosen metric), we will call you pathetic. Fair?
 
J

Jared

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
892
Location
Michigan, USA
bigtoe416 said:
I wonder if the national guard members were being specifically targeted.
Click to expand...

It turns out that I met one of the national guardsmen who was killed. My brother was friends with one of them in a Military College in Vermont, Officer Kelly from Louisiana. Just had his 2nd child.... sad.
 
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
Polynikes said:
Here's the distinction that you fail to understand. I'm not trying to impress my "immoral code" on you or anyone else, so it would be appropriate for you to retract your unfounded accussations right about now. Nowhere in my post did I state that anyone refusing to subscribe to my perspective was wrong, whereas you clearly stated that anyone not subscribing to your point of view is little better than a coward, evidenced by how you refer to my point of view as "immoral" simply because it's not like yours.

I sincerely hope you can differentiate between my stated point of view and your attempt to impress an imaginary code of conduct on anyone who reads your post. I don't see things your way, and no matter how you try to argue your point, my opinion will not change. Despite your condescending tone and attempt to preach from atop your high horse, you will not browbeat anyone here into submission, my friend.

Sorry, I'm not buying it.
Click to expand...

I assure you that in this discussion I fail to understand nothing. Nor am I browbeating anyone and I retract nothing. In my opinion for someone to be armed, trained, able to assist and having an opportunity to assist and fails to do so is unconscionable. What you call an imaginary code of conduct I call morality, humanity, and compassion. But as you, clearly I don't see things your way either. In the end, to each his own. If you could turn your back on your fellow man then so be it. Though I've never been in such a situation I would like to think I couldn't.
 
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
Freedom First said:
My premise: True Freedom is taking total responsibility for yourself.

Is it your assertion that the gun owner on site has a "Moral Obligation" to respond to a AK armed shooter by laying his life down for complete strangers? And this is based soley on the fact that he has taken up his personal responsibility to defend himself?

That doesn't work for me. I have said it many times here, I am no man's protector. I protect myself and my family and it ends there. I may CHOOSE to act on the behalf of another, but I am in no way bound to do so.

Am I a coward? No. My primary goal behind me and my wife being armed is to make sure that we make it home safely every day. Were I to hear AK fire at a business near me, I am heading the other way with my family in tow. Were we trapped inside that business, then, and only then, would those around me benefit from my choice to carry and train with my firearm.

From a logical view of the situation, what if the gun owner carries but never practices? Runs in and winds up shooting more people than the evil psycho with the AK? Crowded resturant, chaos everywhere, adrenaline pumping and no practice? Sounds like he might be more help if he uses the 911 gun.

And lastly, until you walk in his shoes, don't call him a coward. You don't know.
Click to expand...

I agree with your premise and I wish many more took that real responsibility more seriously as opposed to what we have today of the ever growing nanny state to the detriment of your liberty and mine. And NO it is not my assertion that a gun owner has to lay his life down for others, ever! In fact, I've said the exact opposite if you would go back and re-read my posts. Neither is one "bound" to help out another in any scenario. Again, one's primary responsibility is to himself and his family, first and foremost, so moving in the opposite direction to get them to safety is absolutely the right thing to do.

Given a situation where one is armed, trained, able, and yes even having enough opportunity to actually help as opposed to making a really bad situation worse, and that person walks away doesn't make him or her a coward, it makes them, by definition, inhumane. Cowardly would be when that person doesn't or can't act because of debilitating fear. Like it or not, agree or disagree, it is what it is.

ETA: By the way, I never called him a coward.
 
Last edited:
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
wrightme said:
The armed citizen was protecting his business and his family. It was entirely his choice. Monday morning quarterbacking it does not make it "pathetic" by any stretch.


You weren't there, HE was. When YOU are the one there, YOU can do as YOU choose. If you act wrong (by OUR chosen metric), we will call you pathetic. Fair?
Click to expand...

You are misunderstanding my posts. I am neither Monday morning quarterbacking, nor calling the business owner pathetic, nor calling him a coward. I was not there. I am simply offering an argument (ie a position to consider). Whether you agree or disagree is completely up to you.
 
W

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
coolusername2007 said:
You are misunderstanding my posts. I am neither Monday morning quarterbacking, nor calling the business owner pathetic, nor calling him a coward. I was not there. I am simply offering an argument (ie a position to consider). Whether you agree or disagree is completely up to you.
Click to expand...

Your "position" consisted of claiming that someone who does not go after an active shooter is "pathetic." That IS what happened in Carson City at the IHOP.
 
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
wrightme said:
Your "position" consisted of claiming that someone who does not go after an active shooter is "pathetic." That IS what happened in Carson City at the IHOP.
Click to expand...

You need to go back and re-read for clarity. I never said someone who does not go after an active shooter is pathetic. I said, in summary, being armed, trained, able, and even perhaps having ample opportunity and not assisting is pathetic. Like it or not that's my position and I'm sticking to it.

ETA: Just in case someone else thinks I speaking from a high horse...if I were in that situation and I failed to act, then I'd be pathetic too.
 
Last edited:
W

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Then you must have changed your mind, eh? Was it pathetic? Or not?

coolusername2007 said:
That's the first account I've read stating a gun owner was nearby. I would argue that in an active mass casualty shooting like this one has a moral obligation and duty to assist his fellow man. For those who don't there's word for that. I hope he can sleep at night.
Click to expand...

coolusername2007 said:
But in a mass shooting scenario those people are in a life and death situation by the actions of a suicidal maniac and they are in need. And there is a chance that one or more of those persons could be one of your family members, maybe a brother or sister, or mom or dad, niece or nephew, aunt or uncle. And simply based on carry statistics I know that not everyone of them carries everywhere, everyday. Wouldn't you want someone to come to their aid if ever needed? I know that if they were my family members and an able bodied, trained, armed citizen was around I'd be mighty grateful that they stepped up and helped if they could have.

And no, you shouldn't seek out to help everyone the comes your way, after all superheroes are fiction. But in those rare and dire circumstances that we all hope don't happen to us if an able bodied, trained, armed citizen was around, and could have helped, and turned their back on those people that is simply unconscionable. Period.
Click to expand...

coolusername2007 said:
Clearly its situation specific. But to be in a position to help and turn your back is pathetic.

View attachment 6921
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
coolusername2007 said:
You need to go back and re-read for clarity. I never said someone (ie sheeple, a regular person who is neither pro-2a nor anti, and is unarmed, untrained, unprepared) who does not go after an active shooter is pathetic. I said, in summary, being armed, trained, able, and even perhaps having ample opportunity and not assisting is pathetic. Like it or not that's my position and I'm sticking to it.

ETA: Just in case someone else thinks I speaking from a high horse...if I were in that situation and I failed to act, then I'd be pathetic too.
Click to expand...

In blue above to clarify my vague statement. Beyond that poorly phrased statement, my position has not wavered.
 
W

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
coolusername2007 said:
In blue above to clarify my vague statement. Beyond that poorly phrased statement, my position has not wavered.
Click to expand...

I know. You were clear. You claimed that a person with the means, such as the armed business owner, who didn't go after the active shooter, was pathetic. So far, you haven't introduced anything to counter that statement.

Yet you subsequently tried to deny it. "I never said someone who does not go after an active shooter is pathetic."

Yes, you did. Maybe not in one sentence, in those exact words, but you did.
 
Last edited:
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
Again, you should re-read ALL my posts for clarity. From the beginning I said I did not know all the facts. And further I stated "I would argue that...". I never claimed the business owner to be anything, and I never called him anything. Does he meet all the clarifying statements I've made? I don't know. But if he does then yes he would be pathetic. If he doesn't, which is the more likely scenario, then we can have that debate and judge him in the court of public opinion after all the facts are known. Can't make it any more clear than that.
 
J

jayspapa

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Messages
313
Location
South end of the state, Illinois, USA
I've read this thread from the beginning . I seen some argue that he had a moral responsibility to engage the rifleman and others saying he had no moral responsibility to engage.

I have a couple questions though. 1) What is the distance between the BBQ shop and the Ihop? I haven't seen anything said about the distance. 2) What was the BBQ owner armed with?

If it is 75 or 100 yards between shops and the BBQ owner was armed with a small hand gun like a snub nose .38 or a little .380 , just how many would go hot footing it across an open parking lot ?

In that situation , I know I wouldn't have.
 
W

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
coolusername2007 said:
Again, you should re-read ALL my posts for clarity. From the beginning I said I did not know all the facts. And further I stated "I would argue that...". I never claimed the business owner to be anything, and I never called him anything. Does he meet all the clarifying statements I've made? I don't know. But if he does then yes he would be pathetic. If he doesn't, which is the more likely scenario, then we can have that debate and judge him in the court of public opinion after all the facts are known. Can't make it any more clear than that.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you said that. Your denials simply fall flat.
 
coolusername2007

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
jayspapa said:
I've read this thread from the beginning . I seen some argue that he had a moral responsibility to engage the rifleman and others saying he had no moral responsibility to engage.

I have a couple questions though. 1) What is the distance between the BBQ shop and the Ihop? I haven't seen anything said about the distance. 2) What was the BBQ owner armed with?

If it is 75 or 100 yards between shops and the BBQ owner was armed with a small hand gun like a snub nose .38 or a little .380 , just how many would go hot footing it across an open parking lot ?

In that situation , I know I wouldn't have.
Click to expand...

Excellent questions to which I don't have the answers. But answers to questions like these and many more would certainly be interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top