Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I seriously doubt that you have actually read the OP's first post. Where does he show you he wanted a confrontation.. I didn't ever say out run anyone. Just Keep the car moving and and don't be a sitting target.
I seriously wonder if you are responding to what I wrote. I never wrote that the O.P. wanted a confrontation. Why would you imply I did?
I simply disagree with your idea of keeping the car moving; in my opinion it is a bad idea. In any fight you want to pick your battlefield and in my opinion a well lit parking lot is far better than a ditch out in the country after some lunatic runs you off the road.
I would find a place to pull off the road and call the police. I would prepare to defend myself if the individual pressed his assault. I have no reason to run from anyone.[/quote]
]
Your post #49
You said "In my opinion it is best to stop and see if he has a problem with me that he is willing to die for."
Your definition of confrontation is sure different than mine.
If you did not grow up around guns, you will need a lot of practice and I don't mean only target practice. Otherwise you are liable to shoot yourself or someone around you, not to mention that many people with a gun around the house are much more likely to get shot by the very same gun.
In a high-adrenaline situation when folks panic, they often miss the target completely since they are all shaken up and knees are shaking, they just pull the trigger and spray bullets. I would advise against a gun. Carry a baseball bat or a metal bar instead.
While some of these points are true, the basic premise that selecting a lesser defensive tool on the basis of meager training is laughable. Can a person expertly skilled in the use of a ball bat as a defensive weapon beat a gun toter who has no training at all? Maybe, if the conditions are right and all goes well. Same for a metal bar. There is a reason the handgun is sometimes referred to as the equalizer and the ball bat is not. Sure, a handgun is not ALWAYS the best tool, especially to the untrained. For instance, if we are within ten feet of one another, and I attack you with a knife, your chances of engaging me effectively with a handgun are slim at best, unless you already have it aimed at my cerebral cortex and are skilled enough to place your first shot there on a moving target. That is a very specialized situation, which I laid out simply to show that a handgun is not a panacea for all situations. However, in MOST defensive situations in a peacetime society, the handgun is hands down the most effective defensive weapon available. This becomes even more true if the user has taken the time and effort to become tactically proficient with the weapon, AND learned and practiced the associated skills that help them avoid being forced to use it, particularly if the aggressor has a firearm and is even marginally proficient with it.
Let look at employment of a defensive weapon. Some requirements are:
1.That it be usable with one hand, in case one hand/arm is disabled, pinned, or even missing.
2.That it be able to stop an aggressor before you are too damaged to do so.
3.That it be available at all times.(We don't get to pick the where and when of defensive fights.)
4.That it allow you the element of surprise when having to deploy it.
5.That it increases your capability to deal with multiple assailants.
6.That it be a legal and acceptable instrument for the defense of life and property.
7. That there be locally available training in the use of the chosen weapon.
There are other requirements of a defensive weapon in certain areas an situations, but the above are a good starting point. Now, lets compare weapons. I will list the weapons and follow each with the numbers of each above requirement met by the weapon.
Handgun- 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Knife- 1,3,4,6(marginal)
Ball bat- 5,6(marginal)
Metal bar- 1(depends on size),5,6(marginal)
Bow and arrow- 5,6,7
Shotgun- 2,5,6,7
Rifle- 2,5,6(marginal),7
Taser- 1,2(usually),3,4,6,7
As we can see, all the weapons listed, save the handgun, are deficient in at least some of the requirements, and most are deficient in the most important area of all, the ability to have the weapon available for use at all times. Try carrying a metal bar, bow and arrows, or ball bat everywhere you go and watch the police react. The absolute best option for personal defense in our society is a good handgun carried by a trained and responsible individual.
I seriously wonder if you are responding to what I wrote. I never wrote that the O.P. wanted a confrontation. Why would you imply I did?
I simply disagree with your idea of keeping the car moving; in my opinion it is a bad idea. In any fight you want to pick your battlefield and in my opinion a well lit parking lot is far better than a ditch out in the country after some lunatic runs you off the road.
I would find a place to pull off the road and call the police. I would prepare to defend myself if the individual pressed his assault. I have no reason to run from anyone.
]
Your post #49
You said "In my opinion it is best to stop and see if he has a problem with me that he is willing to die for."
Your definition of confrontation is sure different than mine.[/quote]
Yes, that is MY OPINION of what I would do if in that situation. Again I never wrote that the OP was trying to force a confrontation. I DID read his post and understand how HE reacted.
I do not feel pulling over into a well lit parking lot, calling the Police and sitting tight "forcing" a confrontation. I call it a good defensive posture. It would be entirely up to the aggressor if he wanted a confrontation. I feel it is much safer if the vehicles are not moving.
While some of these points are true, the basic premise that selecting a lesser defensive tool on the basis of meager training is laughable.
People have finite time and means to do things. You sit down and assess the risk, reward and bottom line.
If you live in a high risk area, have a high risk job or travel through high risk places - spending the money, time and energy to become an excellent marksman with a calm disposition would be highly prudent, obviously.
On the other hand, if you COULD become a target in a one off chance (majority of us), maybe you don't want to spend the hundreds of dollars on a weapon and countless hours and money on target practice and ammo (not everyone has a range behind their house and most of us have to pay to shoot somewhere); then there are all the risks of owning a weapon and finally, maybe your disposition is not such that owning a weapon is a great idea to begin with - maybe you are nervous around them, maybe you scare easily, etc. etc. Not to mention the fact that most people may not even like guns (65% of American households do not own one) - if you don't like it you are likely not to get the training you need
Most people would get more use out of paying more attention to their surroundings, maybe having a dog or two at home and a baseball bat, making sure they understand where they are going if it is an unknown area and so on. When we used to go for a vacation to a place we never visited before, I would make sure I did my research prior to the visit. What is the crime rate, where does it happen, what to avoid, what are the general problems in the area, is the hotel we are staying at in a nice/posh area or some run down hood (obviously avoid the latter), so on and so on. Doing this will pretty much eliminate 95% of all the problems you may encounter. Yes, there is a small chance things may happen to you anywhere but you know what? That's life - a piano could fall on your head walking on a sidewalk underneath a building too - I don't see people pushing helmets on others as much as guns are pushed everywhere
OP handled it, and it's now over. Had he had a gun, he would have been looking for a chance to use it instead of looking for a chance to get away.
Totally not true. I have a CCW in 10 states (if you count reciprocity laws).
While I of course do not always carry, when I do, I run into my share of idiots out there. The last thing on my mind is to pull out a firearm and shoot them. I have never done this, despite 35 years of concealed carry.
A spare tire is there to help the situation. A gun always makes things worse.
OP handled it, and it's now over. Had he had a gun, he would have been looking for a chance to use it instead of looking for a chance to get away.
The first sentence of the second portion of your post is not even close to truth, as the OP does not seem to yet know who targeted him, or why. It may or may not be over.
The bolded sentence is simply a line from the anti-gun playbook and is not only disingenuous, it is one of the most stupid ideas ever put forward in this debate. I have personally carried a handgun every day of my life since I turned 21, and I have never shot anyone. I have pulled my weapon a grand total of twice in the last 21 years, and was not forced to shoot anyone either time. I have been some rough places and dealt with some rough people in my life, and I can tell you the willingness to do so if necessary often heads off the need to actually do the deed.
In addition, I have never known anyone who owned a gun legally who went around looking for an opportunity to shoot someone, and I know and have known a LOT of gun owners. On the contrary, those of us who carry a gun every day are MUCH more likely to de-escalate and walk or run away from a confrontation, because we know that once a fight starts, neither party has any guarantees about where it will end. Nobody wins a fight where someone is shot. The shootee is dead or wounded, the shooter has a criminal investigation and possibly a civil suit in their future, as well as the after-effects of hurting or killing another human being. Only a mentally ill person desires to use a weapon on another person. In fact, your sanity is in question here, as you seem to be of the opinion that a gun(inanimate object) causes an insane urge to use it on another person. Of course, perhaps you are perfectly sane and simply attempting to further the anti-gun agenda, (which makes you crazy, as well).
Last edited by countryboy73; 07-03-2015 at 08:47 PM..
The first sentence of the second portion of your post is not even close to truth, as the OP does not seem to yet know who targeted him, or why. It may or may not be over.
The bolded sentence is simply a line from the anti-gun playbook and is not only disingenuous, it is one of the most stupid ideas ever put forward in this debate. I have personally carried a handgun every day of my life since I turned 21, and I have never shot anyone. I have pulled my weapon a grand total of twice in the last 21 years, and was not forced to shoot anyone either time. I have been some rough places and dealt with some rough people in my life, and I can tell you the willingness to do so if necessary often heads off the need to actually do the deed.
In addition, I have never known anyone who owned a gun legally who went around looking for an opportunity to shoot someone, and I know and have known a LOT of gun owners. On the contrary, those of us who carry a gun every day are MUCH more likely to de-escalate and walk or run away from a confrontation, because we know that once a fight starts, neither party has any guarantees about where it will end. Nobody wins a fight where someone is shot. The shootee is dead or wounded, the shooter has a criminal investigation and possibly a civil suit in their future, as well as the after-effects of hurting or killing another human being. Only a mentally ill person desires to use a weapon on another person. In fact, your sanity is in question here, as you seem to be of the opinion that a gun(inanimate object) causes an insane urge to use it on another person. Of course, perhaps you are perfectly sane and simply attempting to further the anti-gun agenda, (which makes you crazy, as well).
Oh, the old, "You disagree with me, so you're crazy" defense.
Come on, countryboy. You can do better than that.
OP said he would "be prepared" on his next trip. **shrug** I guess he'll "be prepared" with peace of mind that the gun is locked away???
Oh, the old, "You disagree with me, so you're crazy" defense.
Come on, countryboy. You can do better than that.
OP said he would "be prepared" on his next trip. **shrug** I guess he'll "be prepared" with peace of mind that the gun is locked away???
The OP never came back to this thread.
When he posted, he said he would never be a victim again. I told him to get a baseball bat or a metal bar but he said no, he had those in his car when this happened anyways. Well, he had them, the guys came at him on foot but he managed to evade them in his car. So, he did not even need a baseball bat, let alone a gun.
That begs the question - if he had a gun, what would he have done differently? He never replied to that either.
This person, the OP, did not grow up using guns and has not been trained to use them like some posters here.
The person who wrote these words:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashpelham
For the next 10 miles, 15 minutes, in a heavily traveled, and high density area, no law enforcement ever came to assist.
I was panicked, with rapid heart rate and sweat. I was thinking of my wife and my two daughters at home, about 5 miles south of our location. The officer followed me home to my garage. ... I informed him that I did not previously own any firearms, but that would now be changing.
I will never allow myself to be a victim again.
I will not live in fear in these United States of America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashpelham
it was such a panicked situation for me, and I expected the driver to exit his car with a firearm at any moment.
I will be prepared for my next road trip.
...is not considering a firearm purchase from a rational place of interest and a desire to learn. He now swearing to buy a gun as a reaction to fear and panic, which increases the likelihood that he will USE the gun in reaction to any fear and panic he encounters in the future.
Now, THIS:
Quote:
Originally Posted by countryboy73
Nobody wins a fight where someone is shot. The shootee is dead or wounded, the shooter has a criminal investigation and possibly a civil suit in their future, as well as the after-effects of hurting or killing another human being.
is why I wrote that a gun makes a situation worse. Thanks for making my point for me, CB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ognend
The OP never came back to this thread.
When he posted, he said he would never be a victim again. I told him to get a baseball bat or a metal bar but he said no, he had those in his car when this happened anyways. Well, he had them, the guys came at him on foot but he managed to evade them in his car. So, he did not even need a baseball bat, let alone a gun.
That begs the question - if he had a gun, what would he have done differently? He never replied to that either.
IF the OP buys a gun, and IF he ever has another situation like this, I feel certain he will experience and remember the feelings he felt during THIS situation, and he will wish to have a do-over.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I never wrote that the O.P. wanted a confrontation. Why would you imply I did? 
