Fastbolt, Who says they aren't? The thought of accidentally causing harm to an innocent is up there right below allowing my family to be harmed.
Not only does it deserve careful thought and contemplation but also as much training and education as one can afford.
You're right.
If we're judged by the words we use, some folks might be surprised (or not) if they found that others formed certain impressions about their potential willingness to use violence at the expense of other innocent persons.
Now, perhaps this isn't exclusively how things will actually develop in a civil trial setting, since more than 90% of our communication is non-verbal (meaning body language, betraying micro-expressions and other physical indicators of thought and state of mind, etc). People will often create judgments about others based upon non-verbal communication without even realizing it.
Language and commentary used in public online forums, such as this one, for example, can be located and subpoenaed to try and create a way to impeach statements made elsewhere, such as in court, when under oath, or just to create an impression that might be seen as being more favorable to the plaintiff's side of a civil case and perhaps used for advantage by the plaintiff in such a proceeding.
I am NOT an attorney, however, and don't try to pretend to be able to offer legal advice. Not at all.
Having testified in court my fair share of times for my LE career, having testified in federal court as a witness in a civil rights trial and having known many attorneys who practiced law for civil matters, I learned it's prudent to avoid making glib comments or saying things without thinking about them first.
Words mean things. Our bodies speak volumes without our awareness when it comes to non-verbal communication, too.
There are an increasing number of outstanding, and very interesting, classes being given to our LE community on interrogation techniques and non-verbal communication. A lot of cops become qualified as expert witnesses in local courts during their careers. Some of them decide to go to work as PI's upon retirement to supplement their incomes. Some of them don't mind taking money to use their talents and experience for plaintiff's attorneys. I've known some of them.
A word to the wise is sometimes not needed. A word to the unwise is sometimes not heeded.
The 5 words nobody ever wants to hear? "Will the defendant please rise."
Just my thoughts, folks.
Certain injury of loved ones/self versus probable injury of innocents are not the only options. This is why a firearm isn't your only weapon. If I cannot fire, I'm going to plan B (or C or D or E etc...) I usually carry several things that could be used as weapons, if need be. I also bring me along quite frequently. Sure, my chances of protecting a loved one are not as good as using a firearm, in the hypothetical, but the risk of harming an innocent is also lower. I'll take the 30% chance of success and 10% risk to innocents over the 80% chance of success and 80% risk to innocents or the 0% chance of success. It's still a poor option, but I think it is better than the others.