Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: alexander_busek

There was a guy in Seattle that worked in a mall. Heard shots being fired by a shooter. Went to help - he had a pistol. He saw the shooter and told him to stop.

The good guy was shot and paralyzed. BUT - the shooter then ran into a storage room, stopping his shooting and later arrested.

In my mind, the only thing the good guy did wrong was to announce himself to the bad guy. An armed guy shooting up a mall? Just kill him. I know the arguments of surviving in order to be there for the ones you love - and that love you.

Would I be able to live with running away and leaving others to die or be injured? Of course. But probably not without second-guessing myself all the time. And what sort of life would that be?

Agreed though - one needs to know beforehand what circumstances they might use deadly force. A violent argument? So who is fighting in defense of themselves - and who is the aggressor?

Theft of an expensive item? Legal shoot in my state - but no - the punk can have the big-screen TV.

Some guy has a gun out and waving it at the cashier? Bang. Bang. Bang. (If I think I have the drop on the guy.)


11 posted on 03/23/2019 5:34:50 AM PDT by 21twelve (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: 21twelve
As pointed out above, the original analogy is all wrong.

Tina will not die on the spot if you do not give her $50,000.

As pointed out, she has time to find financial help.

A better analogy would be if the robber had the gun pointed at her head and told you that if you do not give him $50,000, he will shoot her.

Of course you don't carry that kind of money, but if you had it on you would you?

I will bet that you would. You really don't want to see her brains all over the floor.

A better analogy would be a demand that you give him the key to your brand new $60,000 Mercedes.

But all of that said, in my mind it misses the point.

If the company Tina works for does not care enough for her to provide her with security and the store is robbed, why should you be expected to furnish security for them at no charge to them but with the potential for ruining your life and the lives of your family?

The store owner could have let Tina carry, could have had private security, could have had the place covered in security equipment...but instead chose the cheap.

And what if the cop walks in the door the instant you draw and shoots you before he gets the picture? It has happened even to plain clothes cops.

Not my pony, not my circus.

13 posted on 03/23/2019 6:16:50 AM PDT by old curmudgeon (There isTha no situation so terrible, so disgraceful, that the federal government can not make worse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson