TexasCHLforum.com

G.A. Heath wrote:I carry a gun so I can defend myself, and those I love. Those who gain the immediate benefit of me defending the previous two are just icing on the cake. I do not carry a gun to protect someone else, nor do I have the mistaken idea that someone else will have to come to my aid if I need it. If I draw I know exactly what the threat is, where its coming from, and why it needs to be stopped. I am not going to go rushing into the middle of a situation in which I know nothing about. Joe is a hero: he went in, forced one guy to drop a weapon, and then helped restrain the suspect. He may have actually saved the life of the guy who was holding the weapon because that man may have been shot had he been holding that weapon when police arrived. However in the same situation I would not do the same because I have a Concealed Handgun License, not a Batman license. To put it bluntly I am not a hero, super or otherwise, nor do I wish to be.

I hope you have good legs to gets you going and running fast like a deer. no pun intended.

Getting away safely without using my weapon will always be my priority, If I believe that I can not do that the the odds are that the threat gets perforated. There is no chance to redo deadly force if you get it wrong, my goal is for me and mine to get out alive and unharmed any way possible. If anyone thinks for an instant that they carry a gun so they can be a hero I hope they make the right decisions at the right time in the right order and have good legal help when its over if they survive.

I am about tired of hearing this batman license crap. That is not what we are saying. It is not about being a hero. It is about doing what is right.

If you have the means necessary to stop a threat to you or anyone else you should do so. To sit back and watch others get slaughtered because you aren't there to protect anyone but yourself and because "they don't care enough about their life to protect themselves" is wrong.

G.A. Heath wrote:Getting away safely without using my weapon will always be my priority, If I believe that I can not do that the the odds are that the threat gets perforated. There is no chance to redo deadly force if you get it wrong, my goal is for me and mine to get out alive and unharmed any way possible. If anyone thinks for an instant that they carry a gun so they can be a hero I hope they make the right decisions at the right time in the right order and have good legal help when its over if they survive.

Confronting evil is not heroic. It is necessary if civilization is to survive. We do that primarily through our law enforcement and legal systems, but when called upon, those of us who are prepared and willing will respond. Not because we want to be heroes but because we cannot stand silent while evil triumphs.

To use deadly force I have to determine that someone or something is a threat to me, or those I care about. At that point I have enough information to act. If escape is possible I will do so, which means I won't be there watching people get slaughtered. If escape is not possible I will fight back which means that the threat or myself will be stopped and once more I will not be watching people get slaughtered. One thing I will never do if run into a situation that myself, or those I care about, are not involved in and use deadly force because I will not have all the facts. I would never be able to live with myself if I shot an innocent person who had just taken the killer's weapon because they didn't know any better than to point it at someone accidentally, or another CHL holder who had just stopped the threat before I get there. Add on to that I do not want to get shot by a LEO, or another CHL holder thinking that he is batman, and doesn't know that I stopped the threat. Going into an active shooter situation when you are not in immediate danger requires training that I am willing to admit I do not have. So while it may seem heartless to many of you I am not going to involve myself if I, or those I care about, are not at risk its a matter of survival.

Just remember if you shoot at me due to some mistaken idea that I may be an active shooter and don't stop me I will shoot back, at that point I won't care if you are another attacker or a CHL holder. And that is an attitude that many LEOs, CHL holders, and other armed citizens do share. So to avoid being on the wrong end of a gun fight I will not involve myself if me, or mine, are not in danger.

G.A. Heath wrote:If escape is possible I will do so, which means I won't be there watching people get slaughtered.

You may not see them but you will know that innocent people died and you had the means to try to stop the threat and left. That will haunt a good man for the rest of his life. Knowing that he could have done something and didn't and people died because of it.

G.A. Heath wrote:I would never be able to live with myself if I shot an innocent person

But you would be able to live with yourself knowing that another person was shooting innocent people and you had the means to stop the threat and didn't?

Where do you draw the line at how far away someone must be before you don't help them? 100 yards? 200 yards?, 400 yards? 1/4 mile? 1/2 mile? 1 mile? The other side of town? The other side of the county? The other side of the state? The other side of the country? Where is it that innocent people become to far away for you to help them with deadly force, and how do you make that decision?

Really? I think common sense should be able to answer that question.

I didn't ask about common sense, I want to know where people draw the line.

Again, common sense answers it for you.

But here you go. Your question was answered earlier by baldeagle

baldeagle wrote:We're not talking about driving halfway across town at breakneck speeds so you can participate in a takedown. We're not talking about listening in on police scanners or 911 and racing to where the action is. We're talking about being in the middle of the situation, while it's actively unfolding, and having the means to do something about it. We're talking about being within hearing distance of the shots and realizing that people are being killed.

So being in the middle of it, another words running to the situation exceeds common sense.

Running to it does not exceed common sense if you are in the area. Like Joe Z. in the Tucson shooting. Or being in a mall and you are on the opposite end from the food court and someone starts shooting and going to it.

So we return to the question how far away does the situation need to be before its too far away for people to run to help?

G.A. Heath wrote:So we return to the question how far away does the situation need to be before its too far away for people to run to help?

Far enough away that you can't get there in time to help. Joe Zamudio was in the same shopping mall. He got there in time to help hold the killer down until the police arrived. Two other people were on the scene. They jumped the killer and took him down.

How close do you have to be before you will act? Will you wait until the muzzle is pointed at you to draw your weapon? If you were standing in the line waiting to shake Congresswoman Giffords' hand and saw the gunman shoot her in the head, would you run away even though you were armed? I'd shoot him in the back in a heartbeat. As many times as it took for him to fall.

As I stated previously, if I had been in the French class when Cho started shooting, I would not have hid under a desk. I would have hit him with all the force I could muster the second he came into view. And I would not stop hitting him until he was down and I had one of his weapons in my hand. Or I would be dead.

Remember "Let's roll" from 9-11? That's what we're talking about. You're in the plane. What do you do? Sit and wait to die? Or fight?

baldeagle wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:So we return to the question how far away does the situation need to be before its too far away for people to run to help?

Far enough away that you can't get there in time to help.