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.
So, there are NO citizens willing to defend their own city? Surely there are plenty of people licensed to carry firearms in that city...where are they when their city needs them? (do they expect someone else to do it for them?)
So, there are NO citizens willing to defend their own city? Surely there are plenty of people licensed to carry firearms in that city...where are they when their city needs them? (do they expect someone else to do it for them?)
Again with your idiotic strawman of the CCW vigilante. Who would risk their freedom, their reputation (which will surely be abused by the media), and the ensuing civil litigation if they take matters in to their own hands? Why should any CCW stand up for anyone else?
Again with your idiotic strawman of the CCW vigilante. Who would risk their freedom, their reputation (which will surely be abused by the media), and the ensuing civil litigation if they take matters in to their own hands? Why should any CCW stand up for anyone else?
LOL, why would they even go to the trouble of obtaining a CCW if they were not willing to use the weapon for defense? Is it SOLELY for their own personal protection?! (Ive heard plenty of times where a CCW carrying, happens to be in a store that is held up and they are able to peacefully resolve the situation, and get police on the way).
You made my point actually, RARELY, if ever is anyone willing to risk their freedom or quality of life, in defense of something they consider important, (like ones own city for instance). They expect police to do that for them.
People may be a little gun shy after seeing what the couple in StLouis was put through for the crime of standing outside with guns on their own property.
LOL, why would they even go to the trouble of obtaining a CCW if they were not willing to use the weapon for defense? Is it SOLELY for their own personal protection?! (Ive heard plenty of times where a CCW carrying, happens to be in a store that is held up and they are able to peacefully resolve the situation, and get police on the way).
You made my point actually, RARELY, if ever is anyone willing to risk their freedom or quality of life, in defense of something they consider important, (like ones own city for instance). They expect police to do that for them.
Not sure where you're going with this since you basically answered your own question. Just like the majority of other scenarios, folks are first and foremost wanting to prioritize themselves, their loved ones, others, overwhelmingly in that order. Risking yourself to save yourself or a loved one is a pretty obvious risk/reward calculation. Expanding that to random others or more vague notions of 'city' should be readily apparent as to why that risk/reward calculation would be fundamentally different.
Having a license to carry gives one the _opportunity_ to use lethal force by firearm in those situations that the carrier deems appropriate, within the context of the laws. It in no way assigns a _requirement_, nor a moral obligation to act in a particular way for a given scenario.
LOL, why would they even go to the trouble of obtaining a CCW if they were not willing to use the weapon for defense? Is it SOLELY for their own personal protection?! (Ive heard plenty of times where a CCW carrying, happens to be in a store that is held up and they are able to peacefully resolve the situation, and get police on the way).
You made my point actually, RARELY, if ever is anyone willing to risk their freedom or quality of life, in defense of something they consider important, (like ones own city for instance). They expect police to do that for them.
Its not "oh hey, I got a gun lets use it". That's a last resort. If there is any possible way to resolve the situation that must be tried first.
Not me. I don’t feel sorry for them at all. They vote heavily Democrat. They deserve every bit of this.
This. If you are conservative or moderate move out of that area. If you are police just let this stuff happen. Walk the other way. Eventually the woke will come for Democrats and maybe then democrat politicians will wake up and see their city destroyed and start enforcing laws. Again, if you are conservative, moderate or even classic liberal or police, move out and never look back.
What a bunch of idiots. They blocked the street and pulled guns on the guy. That was dumb. What was really stupid is the driver stopped and got out again when the road ahead was clear. He deserved the smack down he got.
What are they even protesting?
Couple thing to unpack...
1 This why some states are proposing or adopting "anti riot" laws. It is one thing to protest peacefully without blocking and creating nuisance which everybody supports peaceful protest, but taking charge of streets or blocks or harassing people is another. Despite the left depicting these laws as "anti protest" no they are anti riot.
2 The man made a bad tactical decision when the video clearly shows the mob told him to leave and he had free access to leave the area but choose to stop and confront them again and pull a gun. Laws vary in self defense from state to state but he was no longer in fear of his life or being detained when he was able to drive off so had he got into a gun fight he probably would have been charged with murder or attempted murder. Also the fact that he let anger and frustration get the better of him by stopping once he was clear was a tactical mistake being he was out numbered.
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.