The Sorry State of Today's Journalism

[ovrszd]

Well posted James. I rest.

 

[Citydude]

My wife's a circuit court judge and we live in a community of around 50,000 people. Before she was appointed to the bench, she was a prosecutor. Needless to say, I carry a weapon when we are out in public and am trained and permitted to carry it. That being said, all the training I went through, didn't include using deadly force to run down a fleeing thief that has my property and take the law into my own hands.

Sent from my iPad using TractorByNet

 

[ovrszd]

My wife's a circuit court judge and we live in a community of around 50,000 people. Before she was appointed to the bench, she was a prosecutor. Needless to say, I carry a weapon when we are out in public and am trained and permitted to carry it. That being said, all the training I went through, didn't include using deadly force to run down a fleeing thief that has my property and take the law into my own hands.

Sent from my iPad using TractorByNet

Well stated.

I think we should let the judicial system figure that out. Might be more to this story than we know.

 

[dwhite]

Right. Look at Singapore. Jail for spitting out gum on the street. Hand amputation for pick-pocket. It's one of the safest cities on the planet. Citizens know the law will be enforced. I read somewhere the pitiful percentage of crimes in DC that are prosecuted. Criminals know the odds are on their side.

 

[Sodo]

If I'm the presence of someone with a concealed weapon, and he's a currently employed policeman, I'm fine, don't even give it a thought other than consider the extra protection in my vicinity. I get comfort from the fact he's trained by (in general) public oversight. If its someone I know to be a good person, then I'm "OK with it", but not really sure either way. Not really sure where hes getting his training. If its someone I don't know anything about, I'd clear out, put some distance between me & him. He might be getting his training in forums, or taverns, other places. Or ask for trouble then be on the hook to defend himself (in my vicinity) from trouble he asked for. Maybe even protect himself from another self-protector, in my vicinity. No thanks.

I was with my family (wife & young kids) in Athens, Greece. We were at a restaurant until midnight. The city was not going to sleep was getting more activity. We saw some sketchy looking guys going by, realized we'd have to walk back to the hotel thru all that. So before getting out into it we watched the people for awhile. After a little while it occurred to us that we were focusing on who were the bad guys, then started to notice that there were all kinds of normal people in the mix who couldnt care less. Little old ladies tottering down the street with purses dangling. At that point were were embarrassed and got up and walked back to the hotel.

Even so, thanks James, enjoyed your post. I don't carry them around but enjoy blasting s*** with friends. With regards to protection I'd certainly be the one shot first because I'd never raise it at a person.

 

[Bird]

Right. Look at Singapore. Jail for spitting out gum on the street. Hand amputation for pick-pocket. It's one of the safest cities on the planet. Citizens know the law will be enforced. I read somewhere the pitiful percentage of crimes in DC that are prosecuted. Criminals know the odds are on their side.

It's been long ago (1971-72 school year) when I was attending the Northwestern University Traffic Institute. One of the classes was on constitutional law and, naturally, one day the Miranda warning that I guess everyone is familiar with was the topic of discussion. There were a number of foreign students in the class including the #3 man in the Singapore police and a Major in the Thailand National Constabulary. On a break, those two came to me and asked, "Do you really do that?" I answered, "Yes, we do, and I suppose you do not." One of them said, "When we arrest someone, WE decided whether he needs an attorney, and if so, who his attorney will be." I don't know how much things have changed since then.:laughing:

 

[Steppenwolfe]

Steppenwolfe is right. I suspect the folks who tend toward the pacifist side of this discussion may never have experienced a physical confrontation with truly bad, evil people - I have. I am not espousing street justice, killing criminals on the street for property crimes where no threat or risk of violence exists - at least inasmuch as this is still a lawful society (in the old west, they did hang horse thieves and rustlers). What I am saying is there's a line to be crossed between property crime and violent crime, and for the most part bad guys are quite willing to cross that. Unless prepared, you may not be able to respond tit for tat if the bad guy cranks it up. You have to be prepared to stop the threat before you are seriously injured or killed.

In public, say walking from car to store, I'm watching what's going on around me. In a restaurant, I'll sit facing the door. Being aware can help prevent becoming a victim.

There's wolves and sheep, and there's sheep dogs - always will be. I have a good friend who won't own a gun. I've tried, can't talk him into it - his call. I've been out with the wife and she's leaned over and asked quietly, "You do have your gun with you?" Always. Not looking to shoot anyone, to suggest so is silly, I was a cop in a crime infested city for 10 years and managed to "not shoot anyone". That said, I could hardly turn away from a situation where someone needed help, not my nature.

Very well said, it is about the ultimate peace of mind, isn't it?

 

[Steppenwolfe]

James KØUA... Great article. Thanks for posting. I think the world needs more sheep dogs...

 

[jlgurr]

If I'm the presence of someone with a concealed weapon, and he's a currently employed policeman, ...

If a person is carrying concealed YOU should not know he/she is carrying. If you know then it's no longer "concealed."

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

 

[ovrszd]

My wife and I had an interesting conversation about people legally carrying a weapon yesterday. She said if I see someone carrying a weapon into a public forum I am alarmed and reluctant to be around that person. I said, so if you are walking across the parking lot of Walmart and you see a person also heading toward the entrance and they are carrying you will separate yourself from them? She said yes. I said okay, so you both enter the store and you separate yourself. Then a moment later you see a crime being committed such as someone brandishing a weapon with intent to do harm would you look around to see where the "carrier" went?? She said yes, I would expect him/her to enter the situation and respond. She perfectly fits into part of what James posted. The Sheep are nervous about the presence of the Sheep Dog until the Wolf shows up.

 

[Sodo]

What if you heard gunfire, and there happened to be another sheepdog in Walmart. Are you guys going to determine correctly, in a split second, (before the next gunshot) that the wolf is not you/him? Remember that to preserve his own safety the wolf has to shoot you first.

Certainly, there are people who can do this. Maybe one in 20? One in 10? I don't know, but if theres guns in walmart (other than behind the counter) I highly doubt they are behind skilled, trained hands. You guys who are trained are the one in ten (or 20) and the rest of us are justifiably concerned about the other 9 (or19).

 

[ovrszd]

What if you heard gunfire, and there happened to be another sheepdog in Walmart. Are you guys going to determine correctly, in a split second, (before the next gunshot) that the wolf is not you/him? Remember that to preserve his own safety the wolf has to shoot you first.

It is very easy to "create" scenarios against the concept of arming the Sheep Dog.

It's also very easy to "create" scenarios where the only one armed is the Wolf and his intent is to kill everyone in the store.

So,,,, would we rather have 1 Sheep Dog killed in the process of defending the Sheep?

Or,,,, would we rather have the Sheep all be killed?

 

[ovrszd]

Let me also add, 99% of the time I can instantly identify the Sheep Dog from the Wolf by doing what the Sheep hate most, "Profiling".

 

[Sodo]

Everybody profiles. Sheep profile sheepdogs. :laughing:

 

[ovrszd]

Everybody profiles. Sheep profile sheepdogs. :laughing:

That is very true. But it seems lately we have a segment of society that won't admit that they too profile.

 

[jlgurr]

Let me also add, 99% of the time I can instantly identify the Sheep Dog from the Wolf by doing what the Sheep hate most, "Profiling".

AMEN! I am so tired of Politically Correct preventing application of Common Sense.

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

 

[Jstpssng]

What if you heard gunfire, and there happened to be another sheepdog in Walmart. Are you guys going to determine correctly, in a split second, (before the next gunshot) that the wolf is not you/him? Remember that to preserve his own safety the wolf has to shoot you first.

Certainly, there are people who can do this. Maybe one in 20? One in 10? I don't know, but if theres guns in walmart (other than behind the counter) I highly doubt they are behind skilled, trained hands. You guys who are trained are the one in ten (or 20) and the rest of us are justifiably concerned about the other 9 (or19).

You raise a good point. Every Right holds an equal amount of Responsibility. Does a 4-8hour CCP course mean that you can make proper choices under stress?(i.e., gunfire) For some it is... The rest of us though should consider advanced training comparable to that of a LEO.

 

[ovrszd]

You raise a good point. Every Right holds an equal amount of Responsibility. Does a 4-8hour CCP course mean that you can make proper choices under stress?(i.e., gunfire) For some it is... The rest of us though should consider advanced training comparable to that of a LEO.

I totally agree with this!!!!! In Missouri, if we had 2 or 3 or 4 locations where academy type hands on training could be incorporated into the CCW training I believe it would sort this out. The true Sheep Dogs would rise to the top and the Sheep would realize their position.

I've spent days and days and days of training in these types of scenarios. Even the most avid Sheep Dog will face his/her maximum capabilities and tolerances. Which, when you think about it, is the intent.

I find it a bit disturbing that CCW training does not do this. Sitting in a classroom watching videos or playing out paper exercises of scenarios is a waste of time. To truly understand yourself you need the roar of gunfire and the smell and taste of exploded gun powder in your mouth.

Not intending to point fingers, I'll just ask this question to be considered with no request for an answer. How many CCW holders reading this thread have had to draw their weapon, loaded with safety off, and point it at another human?? Even smaller number would be, how many reading this thread have pulled the trigger in such a situation??

You need to consider this in your own mind. If you think there would be any hesitation or problem with doing that then you need to consider further training. While there you might decide you are the wrong person to be carrying that weapon.

 

[murphy1244]

You raise a good point. Every Right holds an equal amount of Responsibility. Does a 4-8hour CCP course mean that you can make proper choices under stress?(i.e., gunfire) For some it is... The rest of us though should consider advanced training comparable to that of a LEO.

We just had a policeman jump on the bad guys hood and let go 15 more rounds, so yes I think I could do better than that.

 

[Sodo]

I totally agree with this!!!!! In Missouri, if we had 2 or 3 or 4 locations where academy type hands on training could be incorporated into the CCW training I believe it would sort this out. The true Sheep Dogs would rise to the top and the Sheep would realize their position.

I agree in theory but not in practice. What I see in this scenario is 1 in 10 at the top, a few "near the top", and a few near the bottom who are unlikely to realize their position as sheep. Perhaps angry because while their handling skill & knowledge of guns are exemplary, their attitudes are deemed unacceptable and likely to put the public at risk

Are you going to trust your wife/family to these guys? How many years does this arrangement survive before there is a disagreement between factions. Or a connection with crime or "other" political parties? I predict you would be dissatisfied within half of a generation.

I prefer folks to direct energy and concern (for public safety) towards supporting and refining a reliable police force that is answerable to the public.