Love it, EACH of the (probably intentionally) divided pro-rights options is beating the statist anti-rights answer individually. Good thing they split the pro options, it’d really be embarrassing otherwise.
Yes they are. And they are to put the Feds on notice that we are aware of what they are trying to do, their long range goals, and that we will not stand for it even if blood has to be spilled.
Let’s pile on!
This is a difficult question. If I come into an incident late, I don’t know who is at fault, who is in danger, etc. I could make an assumption about who the bad guy is, and accidentally shoot another armed citizen who had just gained the upper hand on a criminal. For this reason, the armed citizen should be cautious in getting involved in such an incident.
However, this doesn’t mean that I should be unable to intervene if I am absolutely certain of who is at fault, and that without my intervention an innocent person would be dealt grave bodily injury.
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. (multiple votes using multiple internetz devices are allowed!) And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
freeped it!
58.88% Yes, to protect anyone.
16.2 % No- alert authorities
25% Only if it is they, themselves, in danger
Yes, it’s the right thing to do. 58.83% (1,799 votes)
No, they should alert the authorities. 16.29% (498 votes)
A person should only use lethal force if they themselves are in danger. 25% (761 votes)
Total Votes: 3,058
Alert the authorities? What a LAUGH!!
Yes, it’s the right thing to do. 58.86% (1,813 votes)
No, they should alert the authorities. 16.27% (501 votes)
A person should only use lethal force if they themselves are in danger. 24.87% (766 votes)
Total Votes: 3,080