Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
So you have a CCW and...
- Thread starter xiph0s
- Start date
- Status
Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
Sean Dempsey
Member
Huge difference between using a gun defensively to prevent harm to yourself, and using a gun offensively to invite harm to yourself.
neviander
Member
It's your right to be, but defending/protecting your fellow citizens from a mad man, and calling it "using a gun offensively to invite harm to yourself", is selfish.
JackBurtonJr
Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 294
A little judgemental there, eh...
Sean Dempsey
Member
Selfish? Ask my three year old adopted son whose first father already abandoned him once.
I am a graphic designer by profession. I am not a cop, I am not a soldier. MY protective duties, in order, are:
1. Protect my son.
2. Protect my wife.
3. Protect myself.
4. Protect my friends/loved ones
5. Protect my property
6. Protect my friends/loved ones property
7. Protect general public.
By acting on #7 in this subway, I feel I am disregarding rules 1-3. Those are more important. I'm sorry this dude had to get whacked with a hammer, but by trying to ensure the survival of #3, I also am doing my best to ensure the survival of #1 and #2.
Of course, if he had turned the hammer on me and said "I'm gonna find your family now, since you didn't stop me!" I'd have fired my weapon to stop him, yes.
...this is not a ccw Question.
If you have enuff civil-courage and you
are physically up to the job... you attack the aggressor.
The same rules apply in non-armed combat
as with a gun.
Go in for the kill, protect the victim and yourself
from harm.
stab vital points with finger,
use bag-leash to choke,
----------
The most effective weapon is the brain.
If you have enuff civil-courage and you
are physically up to the job... you attack the aggressor.
The same rules apply in non-armed combat
as with a gun.
Go in for the kill, protect the victim and yourself
from harm.
stab vital points with finger,
use bag-leash to choke,
----------
The most effective weapon is the brain.
I doubt that I would shoot in a crowded subway unless he was advancing on me with a hammer and I had a close, clear shot. I seriously doubt that I could run away with a guy getting beat by a hammer. In fact, I know I couldn't. Hopefully I could find a board, rod , whatever, to hit the guy with but if I can't, I believe I'm capable of taking somebody down especially if he's busy beating somebody with a hammer and not expecting an attack.
ZeSpectre
Member
Regardless of what may have transpired earlier, I'm pretty sure I couldn't stand there and watch someone get beat with a hammer. I can't say if my response would involve a firearm or not, that's an "on the spot" call with far too many variables to "keyboard quarterback" from here.
Mickstix
Member
In the hypothetical situation were creating here.. If you had a concealed weapon, and choose to sit idle, while watching another innocent person get hammered to death, I think it'd be fairly hard to sleep at night..
Havegunjoe
Member
My understanding is yes you can carry in Philly. They don't like it but they can't over-ride PA law. So I would draw my legally carried and concealed handgun and stop this creep.
jakemccoy
Member
Sean said:
I hear this argument a lot. It's quite valid on some level. However, every soldier, cop and fireman (including those that went into the twin towers) could make this argument. They don't rationalize by saying "my loved ones are more important than my job". God bless them.
Last edited:
paramedic70002
Member
If my wife was grievously injured in that attack, I would run for congress on an anti-hammer platform.
I watched the video and I can say I would not get involved. I don't think the attacker would stop at the presentation of a gun, therefore you would have to shoot. With his adrenaline level high from whoopin' the guy sitting down it would take multiple shots and I don't think in a enclosed enviroment like a subway car it would be possible to stop the threat and not hit someone else.
rainbowbob
Member
I went back and looked at the video also.
Assuming you happened to be standing about where the camera is, you would have a clear shot either point-blank from behind when he begins the attack - or when he has the victim down on the platform in the door-way.
Obvious assault in progress, target is clear, background looks clear, close range...Bang. Bang.
He is completely absorbed in his "work" and wouldn't even know what hit him.
Assuming you happened to be standing about where the camera is, you would have a clear shot either point-blank from behind when he begins the attack - or when he has the victim down on the platform in the door-way.
Obvious assault in progress, target is clear, background looks clear, close range...Bang. Bang.
He is completely absorbed in his "work" and wouldn't even know what hit him.
jonmerritt
Member.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2007
- Messages
- 463
Gun or not, I would have had to intervene
jakemccoy
Member
From the perspective of the camera, how is the background clear? The victim was right there behind the criminal the whole time.
Anyway, like I said above, unless you saw the whole thing continuously from the very beginning, there's no way to tell who the original aggressor is. (The attack was so sudden, he didn't telegraph his next move, he had a kid, etc.) If people's idea of the original aggressor is the guy who's bigger, I guess I'd look like the original aggressor in most situations where I intervened.
Anyway, like I said above, unless you saw the whole thing continuously from the very beginning, there's no way to tell who the original aggressor is. (The attack was so sudden, he didn't telegraph his next move, he had a kid, etc.) If people's idea of the original aggressor is the guy who's bigger, I guess I'd look like the original aggressor in most situations where I intervened.
NonConformist
member
Thats what happens when people are brainwashed to never do anything and let the police/government deal w/ it
From the info at hand, yeah Id have intervened
From the info at hand, yeah Id have intervened
rainbowbob
Member
From the perspective of the camera, it appeared to me that...
A: The background was clear (and besides - I have magic bullets that only go where I want them to and stay put).
B: The guy with the hammer who initiated the assault and who kept pounding and pounding on the victim who was offering no resistance was clearly the assailant.
These are judgment calls. Those are my judgements based on what I can see in the video. If I was actually there I hope that the situation would be even clearer to me.
I could be wrong - and God help me if I am...but I'll make a judgement call if I'm ever in that position based on what I see, what I hear, and what my gut tells me. I can do no better - and no less. I don't think I could run away or stand and watch and still respect myself in the morning.
A: The background was clear (and besides - I have magic bullets that only go where I want them to and stay put).
B: The guy with the hammer who initiated the assault and who kept pounding and pounding on the victim who was offering no resistance was clearly the assailant.
These are judgment calls. Those are my judgements based on what I can see in the video. If I was actually there I hope that the situation would be even clearer to me.
I could be wrong - and God help me if I am...but I'll make a judgement call if I'm ever in that position based on what I see, what I hear, and what my gut tells me. I can do no better - and no less. I don't think I could run away or stand and watch and still respect myself in the morning.
jakemccoy
Member
If I came into the situation halfway and if I knew about the kid, I would have been confused to the point that it would cause me hesitation. Probably nobody was paying attention to the man here before the incident. Others might have known, in a half-ass way, that over there was a father and his kid. The passengers fell asleep. This father and his kid would not have warmed-up my situational awareness. Then all of a sudden, boom, there was a hammer and the father was swinging.
It's bizarre. However, because I have the benefit of hindsight, I could pretend like my response would have been totally awesome.
It's bizarre. However, because I have the benefit of hindsight, I could pretend like my response would have been totally awesome.
Last edited:
LightningJoe
Member
You could probably get the guy's attention by saying profane things about the object of his religious devotion. Then, when he turned his attention to you, the situation would become clear cut.
Travis McGee
Member
I'd have shot him, no question. It was a deadly or fatal assault in progress. To stop the deadly assault, I'd have stopped the attacker with my CCW.
Of course, if I was in Philly, I wouldn't have a CCW....
Of course, if I was in Philly, I wouldn't have a CCW....
Travis McGee
Member
PS: even without a gun, I'd have jumped in to stop the attack. It's the way I'm wired.
texas bulldog
Member
thanks lastboyscout. i was pretty sure PA had preemption, but i wasn't certain enough to post it myself being an out-of-stater. i haven't lived in PA since i was 13.
rainbowbob
Member
The benefit of hindsight AND the omnicient point-of-view of the camera which caught everything that occurred.
I'm basing my speculative response on all of that - and hoping I would do something totally awesome as well.
But who knows - until or unless you're actually faced with those circumstances - what you'd do?
BullfrogKen
Moderator Emeritus
xiph0s said:
Wait a minute, is this the same Charles Ramsey who I saw in Harrisburg last year sitting next to Ed Rendell when he went before the House Judiciary Committee and railed for an hour about the "gun problem in PA"? Ed Rendell bemoaned the point several times that after PA passed its preemption law that Philly was forced, yes forced, to issue carry permits. He even gave the actual increase in numbers, and then went on and on about how horrible it was.
I didn't hear Commissioner Ramsey testify against Gov. Rendell's position. I didn't even see him get uncomfortable over it.
Just exactly what does Charles Ramsey expect this someone to do? Use harsh language?
Perhaps I'll have to contact his office this week and ask what Philadelphia Police recommends someone do the next time violence occurs in his city. And I hope this someone is there the next time we go visit Philadelphia. This Mr. Someone sounds like quite an impressive person.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked