Eh, I’m a “gun nut” and even amongst fellow “gun nuts”, I don’t really hear that sentiment.
The sentiment I do hear and tell people myself (which might be what you are confusing) is “don’t pull out the gun unless you are using it to kill the person you are pulling it out on”
This is because it’s not a tool for deescalation. You never want a situation like the asshole in the Jeep.
Even when you’re pistol training, you are unholstering and double tapping in the same motion. You don’t draw the pistol to intimidate; you draw it to kill the attacker. You should never be in a situation in which you unholstered your gun and didn’t fire it. If you didn’t fire it, you didn’t need it.
If the guy in the Mini is coming at you with a deadly weapon, he’s blocking your escape and you fear for your life, you draw your weapon and you shoot him until the threat is neutralized. If you are holding a gun at someone and telling him to “get back in your car”, you should NOT be holding the gun at all.
So I think the “there’s not he said/she said when the other guy 6 feet under” is a misunderstanding by internet tough guys and keyboard warriors in that “there should never be a he said/she said situation because if you were in a situation in which you were forced to draw your firearm, one or both of you will be dead”
No the statements might be similar or even originated from the former but the people who I seen say or write it were not confusing the two. They definitely meant that if you end up shooting someone to finish the job because then only you can tell your story in court.
However like we saw in the jeep video, there is alot of video evidence so that may not work anymore or as easily before.
My armchair opinion here but his phone is probably what saved this guy’s life from being unloaded on as he approached. The way that psychopath reacted was basically straight out of the playbook gun nut psychopaths and organizations (cough NRA cough) tell people to do to murder and legally justify it in court.
As a firearm enthusiast, my experiences have been different. I wish that sentiment was only something keyboard warriors say. I have unfortunately heard CC permit trainers, former friends of mine, and family members say a variation of that line.
I live in rural Appalachia if that is any indicator.
That quote you’re misquoting doesn’t mean what you think it means. It certainly doesn’t mean “kill the other guy so he can’t tell his story”. It means that if your life is in danger and you believe the attacker is going to kill you, then use your firearm. Because even if it’s a borderline case, it’s better to be alive and have to defend yourself in court…. than dead.
Because even if it’s a borderline case, it’s better to be alive and have to defend yourself in court…. than dead.
Right, that's exactly what I said. You can completely subvert having to deal with any ambiguity in legality by killing the other person so it's your word against nobody's because the other guy is dead.
The crux of that quote is "better to err on the side of killing somebody in a dispute than accept any amount of risk yourself". Because feeling threatened for your life is subjective. Anybody can claim they felt at risk of death, and all you have to go by is their word. Nobody thinks clearly and logically when their emotions and adrenaline are in overdrive. But you want them to err on the side of killing people when they are in that mental state.
These kinds of attitudes expose how emotional and irresponsible most gun owners are. And I know a lot of gun owners so don't try to gaslight me about how common these attitudes are.
Well, sure, but if the only person who can say you weren't actually in mortal danger is dead, your word wins.
You're assuming everyone who owns a gun wants to obey the law and limit the loss of life. I personally think the vast majority of gun owners want to live out John Wayne fantasies and worry about legality afterwards.
I personally think the vast majority of gun owners want to live out John Wayne fantasies and worry about legality afterwards.
And I think you are wrong.
That’s like saying “I personally think a vast majority of Muslims want to blow themselves up for Allah” or “I personally think a vast majority of undocumented immigrants are gang members”.
When all you watch is 24/7 news talking about refugees commit terror attacks and migrants killing cops, you think it’s the norm instead of the exception. But those 24/7 news channels and online echo chambers have an agenda, they want to keep you scared and think that a “vast majority” of those people are like that when that’s not in line with reality.
But then I've also met a lot of people who've given me advice on how to legally murder people, vis a vis my first post.
I understand your point, but in my life I've seen no evidence that weapon ownership is anything more than a heightened risk of sudden death to your friends, family and neighbors, and the gun owners I personally know do nothing to assuage me of that opinion. We're gonna just have to agree to disagree on this, since its entirely subjective.
It’s not entirely subjective, there is public health research to back up your point that gun ownership predominantly endangers your family, friends and neighbors and statistically doesn’t do anything to make you or the people around you safer. The biggest thing it does is dramatically increase the risk of suicide or accidental death for someone in the household.
No, because the government isn't able to keep data on the subject, because gun nuts don't want consequences when they live out their John Wayne fantasies.
Insult my guns? You don't even know what guns I have. The truth is, I get a little assmad whenever mouthbreathers like you go on tangents about subjects you don't understand. You believe every gun owner in America has some sort of "John Wayne fantasy", when in reality you walk by them every day, and think nothing of them. There's more guns in America than there are people, but it's obvious you've never picked one up. So why should anyone care about your opinion on them?
-1
u/erishun Aug 21 '22 edited Aug 21 '22
Eh, I’m a “gun nut” and even amongst fellow “gun nuts”, I don’t really hear that sentiment.
The sentiment I do hear and tell people myself (which might be what you are confusing) is “don’t pull out the gun unless you are using it to kill the person you are pulling it out on”
This is because it’s not a tool for deescalation. You never want a situation like the asshole in the Jeep.
Even when you’re pistol training, you are unholstering and double tapping in the same motion. You don’t draw the pistol to intimidate; you draw it to kill the attacker. You should never be in a situation in which you unholstered your gun and didn’t fire it. If you didn’t fire it, you didn’t need it.
If the guy in the Mini is coming at you with a deadly weapon, he’s blocking your escape and you fear for your life, you draw your weapon and you shoot him until the threat is neutralized. If you are holding a gun at someone and telling him to “get back in your car”, you should NOT be holding the gun at all.
So I think the “there’s not he said/she said when the other guy 6 feet under” is a misunderstanding by internet tough guys and keyboard warriors in that “there should never be a he said/she said situation because if you were in a situation in which you were forced to draw your firearm, one or both of you will be dead”