Example of restraint

FireForged said:
Speaking just for myself, I wouldn't get too involved in trying to figure out a persons absolute intent. If they are pointing a gun at me during the commission of a crime, I will consider them a deadly threat who likely means to kill me. If someone does not want to be considered a deadly threat, they should probably not point guns at people in some criminal fashion. Certainly there are issues which may take away from or add to the level of danger you perceive from a person but what I previously stated is my default.

This is my point exactly. The article stated that the robber counted down from 10 three times. Maybe after the first count down, you could say he wasn't prepared to pull the trigger, but no way am I waiting to find out if my child's life was on the line. She had her hand on her gun and she claims she had a "clean shot". Things could have ended very badly for them if the robber really decided to start shooting. I'm not willing to say she showed "great restraint" just because no one got killed.
 
Last edited:
The fact the criminal threatened deadly force but did not use it is irrelevant.

The outcome was good ONLY because the victims got lucky in leaving their fate up to their attacker.

There is no "good lesson" to learn nor is some treatise on "restraint" appropriate.

If someone does not want to be considered a deadly threat, they should probably not point guns at people in some criminal fashion.

EXACTLY. She could have saved the poor taxpayers some money and eliminated the possibility the man was going to kill her, her son, or anyone else that day.
 
The fact the criminal threatened deadly force but did not use it is irrelevant.

The outcome was good ONLY because the victims got lucky in leaving their fate up to their attacker.

There is no "good lesson" to learn nor is some treatise on "restraint" appropriate.


I think this is the best way to say it
 
The fact the criminal threatened deadly force but did not use it is irrelevant.

The outcome was good ONLY because the victims got lucky in leaving their fate up to their attacker.

There is no "good lesson" to learn nor is some treatise on "restraint" appropriate.



EXACTLY. She could have saved the poor taxpayers some money and eliminated the possibility the man was going to kill her, her son, or anyone else that day.
I've thought about this a lot ....
You are standing at a bank tellers station and a guy walks up next to you and points a gun at the teller next door..demands $..I have my handgun...do I pull it out and shoot him?

I know you cannot predict anything but I think everybody who CCW should have some answer..
 
USNRet93 said:
I've thought about this a lot ....
You are standing at a bank tellers station and a guy walks up next to you and points a gun at the teller next door..demands $..I have my handgun...do I pull it out and shoot him?

I know you cannot predict anything but I think everybody who CCW should have some answer..
I know what my answer is while sitting in a chair, in front of my computer. That's theory.

Being in the actual situation is practice. Who knows if practice is the same as theory unless/until they face the real world situation? This is why I am not prepared to condemn the woman for not shooting, but I am certainly not going to praise her for having exhibited admirable "restraint." In short, I think she just froze. Even though I have been in armed combat, I can't say with any degree of certainty that I wouldn't have frozen under the same circumstances.
 
I know what my answer is while sitting in a chair, in front of my computer. That's theory.

Being in the actual situation is practice. Who knows if practice is the same as theory unless/until they face the real world situation? This is why I am not prepared to condemn the woman for not shooting, but I am certainly not going to praise her for having exhibited admirable "restraint." In short, I think she just froze. Even though I have been in armed combat, I can't say with any degree of certainty that I wouldn't have frozen under the same circumstances.

I think that this is an excellent answer. We don't even always know what our decisions are based on. Maybe the wedding ring on his hand registered, the crucifix at his neck, the non loaded chamber indicator, on and on, the woman obviously had reasons, and for that set of reasons, she chose to wait until a more solid feeling of danger arose,

Or she froze. I don't know.

The word gestalt applies here. A bunch of trivial information leads to making a huge, dangerous decision. There are half a dozen things that I will observe that are totally unrelated to the danger that is actually presented but will still weigh heavily on my decision. Big, ugly tattoos, thug clothing, dirty and or messy hair. Pointing a gun at the person rather than just brandishing it. a person can look threatening to me while fitting right in with the rest of civilization, and if I kill someone, I sure hope that I don't do it based on incorrect assessment of the threat level. I sure as hell hope that I don't do it based on the band that is printed on his T shirt.

Do any of you remember the movie maverick? when gibson pulled down danny glover's mask? For some reason, glover didn't kill him. I don't know why.
 
Bank, gas station, parking lot, mailbox, isle 7, the public sidewalk... it doesn't really matter, the bottom line is still the same.

I am not a public sentinel but at the same time, I don't really consider myself "SAFE" if I am standing beside some jackass waving a gun around. If I were at the other side of the bank and could simply walk out the door, I probably would. If I am right beside the guy, I will have to make a judgment of him in about a 10th of a second. That decision may involve 100 different nuances but if my GUT tells me that I need to make a move on him, I will.


What I tell people is that you want to be very familiar with how to properly qualify ( or disqualify) the need to use significate force. You should also be able to clearly and competently articulate the method by which you connected the dots, checked boxes and flipped the go switch. No matter what you do, there will likely alwaya be someone who will say you shouldn't have done it. I expect any sort of self defense action to be immediately followed by a long, bumpy and costly road.


I have long sense come to terms with many metal hurdles regarding the use of force and its probably a good idea to mentally address these things sooner rather than later- if you plan to carry a gun. A person should probably examine exactly what they are REALLY willing and prepared to do and at what COST. The last thing you want to experience in the moment is an unwillingness to make the hard decision due to a sense of being conflicted.


I may not always make the right decision but I am going to make it quickly, stand by it and roll with it.
 
Last edited:
What if....

What if a frog had wings? Would he bump his butt on the ground?

What if frogs had pockets? Would they carry pistols and shoot snakes??

I may not always make the right decision but I am going to make it quickly, stand by it and roll with it.

Pretty much it. Reasonable man standard.

Even though I have been in armed combat, I can't say with any degree of certainty that I wouldn't have frozen under the same circumstances.

Reminds of one reason why they send candidates to the Psych's.

You have three kinds of people in combat.

1. Those who can do it and recognize the need in defense of the weak and a free society.

2. Those that cannot do it. Nice people but totally and utterly worthless in terms of lethal force in combat.

3. Then you have the absolutely worst and most dangerous kind. Those who can do it once but no longer. They are the ones that get themselves and those around them killed because they are not able to be honest with themselves. Make no mistake, when the time comes and they fail to act, others will die.
 
Back
Top