Quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
Bull***** on the pepper spray. Buy a gun. Every time some one kills a scumbag mugger, some one else does not have to deal with them. Our catch and release justice system does no good, and simply pepper spraying these folks only temporarily solves the problem. It certainly will not make them give up their life of crime, and the next poor schmuck may have more to deal with than you did.
And a throw-away wallet?? Are you kidding?? Reminds me of when the advice for backpackers was to drop your pack and sneak off when confronted by a bear. All it did was teach the bears how easy it was to get a free backpack full of goodies. As with the bears, this strategy also leaves them out there to attack some one else.
It has always distressed me to read the pacifist/liberal advice on how to deal with a mugging. Give in and give them anything they demand; don't fight back. If you do choose to fight back, by all means don't hurt the poor dissadvantaged, missunderstood individual that is threatening you. Bull*****. It may or may not (and often does not) save your ass at the moment, but it leaves some one else to deal with the problem. Honest citizens have a responsibility to fight back. Not with pepper spray, mace, a whistle, or whatever. With a gun. Yes, you are going to hurt him. Hopefully kill him.
|
I see someone has been spending too much time watching TV and has concluded that a firearm is some sort of "superweapon" that will automatically protect the person carrying it.
I carry a gun every where it is legal for me to carry, but I am NOT delusional about its capabilities or my abilities in using it in a self-defense situation. (Nor am I oblivious to the legal rights and risks involved in using deadly force to defend myself or my property.)
While I am generally very aware of my surroundings, it is not impossible that a criminal could surprise me and I could find myself being robbed. Assuming I am being robbed by a perpetrator with a firearm, I do
not expect to be able to draw my firearm and shoot the perpetrator faster than he can pull the trigger of his gun.
Even if I did train to some extreme level and was able to draw and fire in a fraction of a second, I would not expect that my gun shots will instantaneously incapacitate the perpetrator. The odds are he will be whacked-up on chemicals -- perhaps even just adrenaline -- and I will run the risk of being shot even if I shoot him first. (I'm sorry to inform you, but people rarely are instantaneously incapacitated from handgun rounds the way it is portrayed in the movies and on TV.)
If I am surprised by a robber with a gun, the most practical thing to do to survive, will likely be to give the perpetrator my wallet -- throwing it away is the best distraction -- then put as much distance between the perp and myself as quickly as possible. This means running in the opposite direction I have thrown my wallet. During this time, I will be drawing my weapon; if the criminal does not go for my wallet, but instead chases me, he will be fired upon -- which hopefully will persuade him that further attack against me is not a wise thing to do.
I hardly think that surviving by "getting the hell away from an assault by the most practical means possible" makes a person a "pacifist/liberal." One does not have to be ready to dispense "vigilante justice" to prove that one hates crime and criminals. Law abiding citizens do not have any "responsibility" to "fight back" when attacked; in a civilized society the citizens delegate the responsibility to "fight back" to the police and justice system.
The system may not work as well as it could in dealing with criminals, but I do not see that as a reason I should take chances with my life and behave stupidly if faced with an attack from a criminal. This may be difficult for a generation raised on Hollywood’s firearms to understand, but drawing a gun isn’t always your best defense in a robbery situation.