How will you defend your person, property, and family, if needed? - Page 5 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Martian · 06-06-2008, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

Why do I have a concealed pistol permit? It'll probably save my life in the minuscule chance I that get into an altercation with an armed crackhead while my girlfriend and I are walking the groceries to the Cromp-wagon.

Complete off-topic, I'm very amused by the new name for the HHR.

I agree with Crompsin. Concealed carry permit aside, reasonable precautions are.. well, reasonable. As usual, I'm mostly just baffled by the paranoia.

Plan9 · 06-06-2008, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

I agree with Crompsin. Concealed carry permit aside, reasonable precautions are.. well, reasonable. As usual, I'm mostly just baffled by the paranoia.

Personal observation: Paranoia involving the use of guns is almost always male, Caucasian and American.

Go figure.

Jinn · 06-06-2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanblah

but I'm not sure what either one of the victims could have done to prevent it. A gun? A few self-defense classes? Mace/pepper spray? A stun gun?

You're asking this question like there would be an inconvenience on their part to prepare themselves with self-defense classes, mace, pepper spray, a stun gun, or even a firearm. What could they have done? Who knows, but I can tell you that these things wouldn't have HURT the situation.

I guess I can understand the logic of "why bother?," but I think it can only come from a belief that these things are either so uncommon (willravel) or so non-life threatening that they don't justify even the littlest amount of preparation.

Quote:

When you are ambushed there's very little you can do; and these people were ambushed. Not to mention the fact that they were outnumbered.

You're right, there's very little to do when you're ambushed. However, a little bit of preparation can go a long way in preventing the ambush from ever happening. Things like not walking alone at night, for one. That's my goal for the thread, at least, despite the continual regression to firearms. What will you do? Most people I know aren't responsible enough to own or safely use a firearm, so I'll be the last person you hear recommending it for Joe Blow. But there are a lot of effective strategies being flat-out IGNORED because people convince themselves that it's a random and unlikely occurrence and the results will not be life-threatening. My point in posting the Blotter excerpts is to show that more often than not, it is not random or unlikely, and it is often very life-threatening.

Quote:

I presume that MOST of us are very aware that crime is ever-present--not just violent crime--but quoting statistics without any kind of follow-up is just sensationalism and only serves to further the feeling of paranoia and fear that is becoming pervasive in this country.

I 'presume' the opposite, and I think it's clearly demonstrated by the amount of people who think it won't happen to them or that violent crime doesn't exist in their city. Even as 'aware' as I am, I'm shocked by the amount of crime that happens in my "safe" city, every day. Hell, in the time since I last posted and now there's been another sexual assault:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blotter

A 49 year old female was walking to work at approxiamately 0530 hrs when she was contacted by two males who forced her into a vehicle and drove her to an unknown location and sexually assaulted her. The victim did not know the suspects.

Quote:

My biggest concern with that is: vigilantism/street justice. I mean, sure I've had thoughts of taking the law into my own hands but there is nothing scarier to me than a drunken and paranoid person with a gun*.

On this, I agree. You must be mindful, of course, that being in simple POSSESSION of a firearm while under the influence of any intoxicating substance, whether alcohol or marijuana, is illegal. Its a terrible thing to lump the legal, responsible owners of firearms with criminals, just because they own the same tools.

I'd love to take you shooting sometime, so you could see (for perhaps the first time in your life) what a responsible adult does with a legally-owned firearm to ensure the safety of themselves and everyone around them. Let me know if you're ever near Colorado.

vanblah · 06-06-2008, 08:35 AM

No, I'm not asking the question as if it would be an inconvenience. I was only referring to THIS case; and in this case there really was no answer. You are correct that any of the things I listed (gun, pepper spray, etc.) wouldn't have HURT the situation ... the end result would have been pretty much the same. They'd be dead.

I am fairly positive that the number of responsible gun owners is probably greater than the number of irresponsible gun owners (if we exclude the criminal element). I am also good-friends with several cops in this town (and others). I just happen to know MORE people who are irresponsible.

I also don't think Will is advocating a "why bother" kind of attitude. Neither am I. Just that there's no reason to dwell on statistics ... be prepared, but don't be paranoid.

Jinn · 06-06-2008, 08:36 AM

I have yet to post a statistic.

vanblah · 06-06-2008, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jinn

I have yet to post a statistic.

All of your anecdotes from the "Blotter" are statistics. Perhaps I should always refer to them as anecdotes from now on. Although, they aren't really anecdotes either.

MSD · 06-06-2008, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

The cost of carrying a gun aren't necessarily low.

There are risks to children who use the gun without having the maturity to appreciate the dangers and repercussions:

According to the Department of Justice, during no yearsince 1976 did the annual number of gun deaths among ages 0-17 exceed 3791. You have to start stretching the definition of "child" by a few years to get the statistic you're quoting.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicid...weapagetab.htm

Most of those youth deaths are drug or gang related anyway. I'm really, really unlikely to come across a situation where having a gun can save me, but if carrying around something I bought for fun instead of locking it up when I'm not at the range might save my ass someday, why not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

why was my post deleted?

Mods can see deleted posts, but I don't see any

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

Further to that, I also sort of think that pulling a gun on someone who's after my wallet or my car or anything else material just seems like a good way to cause him to panic and do something unpredictable (and probably very, very bad for me).

That's a strawman. It's not about saving a wallet or a car, it's when it comes down to making a choice between defending ourselves or being shot/stabbed/whatever.

sapiens · 06-06-2008, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

Not talking guns specifically... but unreasonable when the consequences of not being prepared may be horrible injuries or death?

I would expect there is a line of reason, but people draw the line in different places. When you come home, you could patrol you house with weapon drawn, carefully looking outside of each window, monitoring for possible threats to you, your family, or your property. You could install cameras around your entire home inside and out and monitor them every waking hour. It might reduce the chances of a home invasion. Some might consider that reasonable, others won't.

Quote:

Crappy analogy: Flashy stuff like martial arts training and firearms are the top of the self-defense pyramid, with the base being situational awareness and not-being-a-dumbass. Everybody likes the top of the food pyramid (junk food) but without the balance the base provides, we'd all be blubber-farmin' couch anchors. Everybody likes to talk super-karate and Glock 17s... but it comes down to having nice deadbolts and leaving the lights and TeeVee on at night when you're out walking the cat. Without the balance the base of the self-defense pyramid survives, we're just paranoid dolts packing heat.

I don't think that it is a crappy analogy. Personally, I'm more interested those "base of the pyramid" strategies that will reduce my chances of ever having to interact personally with a threat (the full-range of strategies one can use to be safe). As you seem to suggest, those base of the pyramid strategies may account for more of the variance in crime avoidance than kung-fu and guns.

Regarding the dog point, I have no illusions about my dog. If an intruder enters the house, he will likely greet that intruder happily. However, my dog seems good at warning me whenever there is something strange going on outside of the house.

Martian · 06-06-2008, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSD

That's a strawman. It's not about saving a wallet or a car, it's when it comes down to making a choice between defending ourselves or being shot/stabbed/whatever.

It's really not. How do you determine what the intent is? My impression from what I've read previously is that anybody who poses a potential threat is somebody who should be neutralized. This goes contrary to what I believe to be human nature -- most folks in your typical mugging/burglary situation are probably not looking to kill someone, although it's a high stress situation and they may resort to that if pressured. So how do you decide whether this guy is a threat? Is it just because he's holding a knife or a gun? Do you ask first? How exactly does that work?

The instant you show a weapon you escalate the situation. I'd prefer not to put myself in that situation and trust that the risk of an unprovoked attack is much lower. Granted part of that may be small town living; I don't have to worry so much about such crimes because they don't generally happen in my part of the world. Even still, it seems like me that carrying a gun, even responsibly, puts you at greater risk than you would be otherwise.

Of course, that's just my impression. I've done no research on the subject, and I really don't think any truly meaningful research can be done.

Jinn · 06-06-2008, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Granted part of that may be small town living; I don't have to worry so much about such crimes because they don't generally happen in my part of the world. Even still, it seems like me that carrying a gun, even responsibly, puts you at greater risk than you would be otherwise.

I think you're right about the small-town living thing. On the latter, not so much.

dksuddeth · 06-06-2008, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

It's really not. How do you determine what the intent is? My impression from what I've read previously is that anybody who poses a potential threat is somebody who should be neutralized. This goes contrary to what I believe to be human nature -- most folks in your typical mugging/burglary situation are probably not looking to kill someone, although it's a high stress situation and they may resort to that if pressured. So how do you decide whether this guy is a threat? Is it just because he's holding a knife or a gun? Do you ask first? How exactly does that work?

The instant you show a weapon you escalate the situation. I'd prefer not to put myself in that situation and trust that the risk of an unprovoked attack is much lower. Granted part of that may be small town living; I don't have to worry so much about such crimes because they don't generally happen in my part of the world. Even still, it seems like me that carrying a gun, even responsibly, puts you at greater risk than you would be otherwise.

Of course, that's just my impression. I've done no research on the subject, and I really don't think any truly meaningful research can be done.

The problem with the attitude of 'he only wants money and if I submit, he'll leave after he gets what he wants' is that you only get to make the mistake of 'trusting' the person who has just threatened your life with not actually killing you one time and one time only.

MSD · 06-06-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

It's really not. How do you determine what the intent is? My impression from what I've read previously is that anybody who poses a potential threat is somebody who should be neutralized. This goes contrary to what I believe to be human nature -- most folks in your typical mugging/burglary situation are probably not looking to kill someone, although it's a high stress situation and they may resort to that if pressured. So how do you decide whether this guy is a threat? Is it just because he's holding a knife or a gun? Do you ask first? How exactly does that work?

The instant you show a weapon you escalate the situation. I'd prefer not to put myself in that situation and trust that the risk of an unprovoked attack is much lower. Granted part of that may be small town living; I don't have to worry so much about such crimes because they don't generally happen in my part of the world. Even still, it seems like me that carrying a gun, even responsibly, puts you at greater risk than you would be otherwise.

Of course, that's just my impression. I've done no research on the subject, and I really don't think any truly meaningful research can be done.

It's intuition and analysis of the situation. Displaying a weapon is not escalating because you don't draw a gun during a mugging or robbery if you don't intend to use it. Drawing the gun is intent to use lethal force and you just don't do it unless there's no other option. There's a difference between "give me your wallet" and "I'm gonna kill you." Even with your small town lifestyle, I think you could look at someone and make an educated guess about whether or not tossing your wallet to a mugger would end the incident.

Martian · 06-06-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

The problem with the attitude of 'he only wants money and if I submit, he'll leave after he gets what he wants' is that you only get to make the mistake of 'trusting' the person who has just threatened your life with not actually killing you one time and one time only.

How many times do you get mugged in a week?

Odds on are that I'll only have to make that decision once anyway, if at all. And should that situation occur, the odds are that the guy I'm looking at is probably not a cold-blooded killer; they're really not that common. It strikes me that the probability is also high that he's very tense and quite probably more than a little desperate. Most of what's in my wallet is a bunch of plastic that I can cancel with half a dozen phone calls. If he wants forty bucks and a couple receipts, he can have 'em. My life is worth more.

These seems like pretty basic psychology to me. If you threaten a guy who's already tense, he's likely to react react violently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSD

It's intuition and analysis of the situation. Displaying a weapon is not escalating because you don't draw a gun during a mugging or robbery if you don't intend to use it. Drawing the gun is intent to use lethal force and you just don't do it unless there's no other option. There's a difference between "give me your wallet" and "I'm gonna kill you." Even with your small town lifestyle, I think you could look at someone and make an educated guess about whether or not tossing your wallet to a mugger would end the incident.

Granted that's true. On the other hand, it strikes me that if the guy is really intent on doing me in I'm probably not going to have much chance of defending myself anyway. Think about it; if someone decides that they're going to go out and kill a person, that someone is unlikely to declare a formal duel and give you ten paces. I'm all too aware that I'm not Superman, and that if someone with a gun decided that they wanted to kill me they could in all probability do it before I had a chance to react anyway.

So we have mugger who doesn't intend to kill me but is a bit high strung and guy who decides that I need to die and finishes me off before I even know he's there. We have me, who knows to take basic precautions like locking my door and avoiding high risk situations. Where in any of this does having a gun decrease my chances of being hurt?

In a few isolated cases, having a gun may help. It just seems to me that the potential for harm is greater than is merited by the benefit provided. Carrying a gun may make you feel safer, but I've never been convinced that it actually makes you any safer than the rest of us. The handful of anecdotes in this thread seem to reinforce that idea rather than dispel it; none of them seem to make any sort of a strong case that these people would have been any safer with a firearm in their pocket, purse or vehicle.

Bad stuff happens to good people. Bad people make it happen sometimes. The world isn't a nice place, which is something I've long since accepted. I take what precautions I consider reasonable and console myself with the idea that the odds of me actually being involved in something like this are quite low. I just don't see the sense in living my life in fear.

06-06-2008, 08:36 AM	#165 (permalink)
Jinn Lover - Protector - Teacher Location: Seattle, WA	I have yet to post a statistic. __________________ "I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

06-06-2008, 08:35 AM	#164 (permalink)
vanblah Junkie	No, I'm not asking the question as if it would be an inconvenience. I was only referring to THIS case; and in this case there really was no answer. You are correct that any of the things I listed (gun, pepper spray, etc.) wouldn't have HURT the situation ... the end result would have been pretty much the same. They'd be dead. I am fairly positive that the number of responsible gun owners is probably greater than the number of irresponsible gun owners (if we exclude the criminal element). I am also good-friends with several cops in this town (and others). I just happen to know MORE people who are irresponsible. I also don't think Will is advocating a "why bother" kind of attitude. Neither am I. Just that there's no reason to dwell on statistics ... be prepared, but don't be paranoid.