rantingredneck
New member
Not necessarily. It is possible that something could be immoral but still legal for now......
I will agree that what is immoral tends to find it's way to illegal eventually.
Legal Duty to Retreat vs. Moral Duty to Retreat
- Thread starter Wildalaska
- Start date
- Status
Not necessarily. It is possible that something could be immoral but still legal for now......
I will agree that what is immoral tends to find it's way to illegal eventually.
spacemanspiff
New member
In that particular moment, the only thing you should expect is for your mind to react how you have set your mind.
This is what we are doing now, discussing our mindsets.
Erslands mindset may have been 'Shoot to Kill! Shoot to slidelock, reload, then shoot again!', and if thats how he set his mind, then that would be how we should expect his mind to respond.
(Note I am saying 'expect', not saying its 100% beyond a doubt how the mind will react).
Think of it this way: How do you want everyone to comment on your mindset, in the aftermath of a defensive shooting? Do you want your friends, peers, family, to say "He/She is a kindhearted person, never wanted to do harm to anyone, but if anyone put their life at risk or that of their children, they would do whatever it took to ensure their safety"?
Or are those friends and family going to say "Gee I dunno, every time I visited them at home they greeted me at the door with a pistol in hand, and if I ever walked in the front door without them I heard the clicking of hammers being cocked, the sign at the door said "We don't call 911". Every time I sat on the couch I'd find I was sitting on a loaded magazine or gun (funny they never called it a couch, they called it a 'Tactical reload/rearming location 1')."
Only if you are Denethor and you are irritated that Faramir gave up Osgilliath.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Well yes, but that's in the real world. I was speaking of the world wherein morality is invented (present day America). If morality is defined as so many would have it be, by the will of the majority or better stated by those with power, then "legal" IS "moral".
Therefore, in answer to the OP. If it is legal then it is moral. If it is illegal, immoral.... but tomorrow that may change.
Wildalaska
Moderator
"May God bless you my dear John Ronald and may you say things I have tried to say long after I am not there to say them if such be my lot.
Yours ever,
G. B. S. "
The last words of G.B. Smith in a letter to J.R. R. Tolkien. Geoffry Smith was killed at the Somme.
WildminorthreaddriftAlaska ™
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Wild, thanks for starting this poll and discussion. For some of us, the issue of when it's OK to take a human life is, or should be, the central question of ethics. 'Bout time we talked about it a bit, without all the posturing which seems to be brought out by particular cases.
rantingredneck nailed it:
If I'm in danger from an attacker, I'll always retreat if I can do so safely. If others are in danger, I'll do the same... with the intention of calling 911, being a good witness, and all that good stuff, if, again, I can do so safely. As has been pointed out ad nauseum in other threads, it's too easy to make a mistake about what's happening in a situation involving other people, and the consequences of being wrong can be huge; so I'm very unlikely to intervene.
Two points haven't been much addressed here: what constitutes retreating, and the difference between protecting life and protecting stuff.
As to the first, "retreating" seems pretty situational to me. If I'm at home and someone breaks in, it means I'm either out the other door, or I'm headed upstairs to the bedroom, exactly as 5whiskey described:
Anywhere else, my first choice is always going to be to get out the back door, or drive away -- whatever gets me out of the situation. I'll be glad to throw a mugger my wallet, if that's what it takes to get away from him.
I don't ever want to take a life over money or possessions -- I'll defend my person if I have to, but for me, anyone's life, even a criminal's, has more value than material objects.
If I'm pursued, I'll do whatever I can to discourage a pursuer: go somewhere where there are other people if possible, etc. Back when I was in college, I was driving back from a camping trip on an empty highway when six guys in an old car tried force me to stop -- which seemed like a really bad idea.
My "retreating" in that situation took the form of flooring it, passing them (my old Chevy was a lot quicker than it looked), getting chased by them -- and after a mile or two, snugging up to the bumper of the first car I caught up to, at which point the six guys drove off, with lots of obscene gestures, etc... If I'd had a gun in the car, I might've shown it to them, but I'm not sure that would have improved the outcome. Getting the hell away and finding some witnesses seemed like the best option then, and it still seems like the right thing to have done.
So here's a question : Does "retreating" mean that you do whatever you'd do if you were unarmed, only knowing that you have a backup if push comes to shove? Or does it mean something different if you're armed: backing off and giving an attacker a chance not to come after you but intending to shoot if he does? In the case of a home invasion, I guess I'd say it means the latter, but out in the world, I'm not so sure.
rantingredneck nailed it:
If I'm in danger from an attacker, I'll always retreat if I can do so safely. If others are in danger, I'll do the same... with the intention of calling 911, being a good witness, and all that good stuff, if, again, I can do so safely. As has been pointed out ad nauseum in other threads, it's too easy to make a mistake about what's happening in a situation involving other people, and the consequences of being wrong can be huge; so I'm very unlikely to intervene.
Two points haven't been much addressed here: what constitutes retreating, and the difference between protecting life and protecting stuff.
As to the first, "retreating" seems pretty situational to me. If I'm at home and someone breaks in, it means I'm either out the other door, or I'm headed upstairs to the bedroom, exactly as 5whiskey described:
Well, actually, I'd call 911 right quick, and I'd pass on the warning shots, but otherwise -- yup, that's me, too. So in this case, "retreat" means to me not to confront an intruder, but to retreat to and hole up in a defensible spot, on the principle that he can take whatever's downstairs, but if he comes upstairs, knowing I'm there, and armed, he is after me and I will defend myself.
Anywhere else, my first choice is always going to be to get out the back door, or drive away -- whatever gets me out of the situation. I'll be glad to throw a mugger my wallet, if that's what it takes to get away from him.
I don't ever want to take a life over money or possessions -- I'll defend my person if I have to, but for me, anyone's life, even a criminal's, has more value than material objects.
If I'm pursued, I'll do whatever I can to discourage a pursuer: go somewhere where there are other people if possible, etc. Back when I was in college, I was driving back from a camping trip on an empty highway when six guys in an old car tried force me to stop -- which seemed like a really bad idea.
My "retreating" in that situation took the form of flooring it, passing them (my old Chevy was a lot quicker than it looked), getting chased by them -- and after a mile or two, snugging up to the bumper of the first car I caught up to, at which point the six guys drove off, with lots of obscene gestures, etc... If I'd had a gun in the car, I might've shown it to them, but I'm not sure that would have improved the outcome. Getting the hell away and finding some witnesses seemed like the best option then, and it still seems like the right thing to have done.So here's a question : Does "retreating" mean that you do whatever you'd do if you were unarmed, only knowing that you have a backup if push comes to shove? Or does it mean something different if you're armed: backing off and giving an attacker a chance not to come after you but intending to shoot if he does? In the case of a home invasion, I guess I'd say it means the latter, but out in the world, I'm not so sure.
rantingredneck
New member
I posit that the two are one and the same. Morality is an invented construct.
The thing is, it is not static. It evolves as society evolves.
Example...........hopefully I don't stray too far afield here into verboten territory, if I do, my apologies and mods feel free to yank the leash.....
50 years ago would a gay man stand in his town square and admit to being gay? Today would a homophobe stand in his town square and admit to being a homophobe? (possibly in some locales, but not in most I would say)
Societal evolution and the evolution of morality.
As to "those in power". That is also not static. At least in functional societies.
Deaf Smith
New member
How about leave it up to the one being attacked as to if they want to retreat or not.
That was not in the poll selection but I feel if you are attacked, it's your decision. As long as you didn't provoke the attack, you are in the right, retreat or no.
That was not in the poll selection but I feel if you are attacked, it's your decision. As long as you didn't provoke the attack, you are in the right, retreat or no.
davlandrum
New member
Obviously the answer to this is very personal.
We recently had "active shooter" training on the campus where I work. It was all focused on retreat and hide. And yes, we are a "non-carry" campus.
Maybe I was in the Army too long, but I would have to run to the gunfire and try to get it stopped. I am better prepared to do that than most of the people I work with, and unfortunately even our campus security are not armed.
So, no, I am not retreating.
We recently had "active shooter" training on the campus where I work. It was all focused on retreat and hide. And yes, we are a "non-carry" campus.
Maybe I was in the Army too long, but I would have to run to the gunfire and try to get it stopped. I am better prepared to do that than most of the people I work with, and unfortunately even our campus security are not armed.
So, no, I am not retreating.
WA, While not a true "modern culture", the radical muslims are some persistant buggers. And with sharia law a father or husband may get to kill a daughter or wife for many reasons not related to self defense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Brent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Brent
guntotin_fool
New member
There is no right and wrong. too many grey areas, too many areas where every little detail from time of day, likely hood of someone else stepping up, etc all play a part.
you see an obvious little girl being dragged behind some cars while guys are Obviously preparing to rape her. NO grey area here, you can hear them, you can see her terror in her eyes, they want nothing to do with you, do YOU walk away?
Two wannabe gansta's walking by. just slug an elderly woman in the head and start trying to rip her purse from her hands all the while screaming "don't make me kill you". Do YOU walk away.
walking past a house, you hear two obviously drunk adults screaming at each other over "her," lots of "i'm gonna kill ya" being tossed back and forth. Do you enter the fray?
so when do you walk, when do you drop the dime, when do you say enough is effing enough?
you see an obvious little girl being dragged behind some cars while guys are Obviously preparing to rape her. NO grey area here, you can hear them, you can see her terror in her eyes, they want nothing to do with you, do YOU walk away?
Two wannabe gansta's walking by. just slug an elderly woman in the head and start trying to rip her purse from her hands all the while screaming "don't make me kill you". Do YOU walk away.
walking past a house, you hear two obviously drunk adults screaming at each other over "her," lots of "i'm gonna kill ya" being tossed back and forth. Do you enter the fray?
so when do you walk, when do you drop the dime, when do you say enough is effing enough?
Tucker 1371
New member
For me, I think you have no duty to retreat within the home. However, there are instances inside the home where you are in a position that under the law you are justified in shooting but you should not (i.e. you stumble across joe thug in your living room with hands full of TV in no position to hurt you or defend himself).
On the street it is a much tougher call. Some will say never intervene no matter what. Others will say it's your moral duty to help your fellow law abiding citizen. I tend to live in the grey area. Rape is a crime I abhor and one that is often followed by murder. If I stumbled across that occurring my stages of response would be this:
1) Yell at the guy (what's going on?, get the **** away from her, etc)
2) 1 fails and I draw CCW
3) 2 fails to get BG's attention and he either becomes violent toward me or moreso the victim, I fire ONLY if I have a PERFECTLY clear shot
Joe Thug knocking over the 7/11 is a different story. There is no way I am using a gun to intervene in that situation unless the BG is already shooting. Even then I may not unless he is blocking my exit from the store.
On the street it is a much tougher call. Some will say never intervene no matter what. Others will say it's your moral duty to help your fellow law abiding citizen. I tend to live in the grey area. Rape is a crime I abhor and one that is often followed by murder. If I stumbled across that occurring my stages of response would be this:
1) Yell at the guy (what's going on?, get the **** away from her, etc)
2) 1 fails and I draw CCW
3) 2 fails to get BG's attention and he either becomes violent toward me or moreso the victim, I fire ONLY if I have a PERFECTLY clear shot
Joe Thug knocking over the 7/11 is a different story. There is no way I am using a gun to intervene in that situation unless the BG is already shooting. Even then I may not unless he is blocking my exit from the store.
Given the OP's position as I understand it: situation is one where deadly force "could" be used, . . . but I have the option to leave safely.
If there were no other considerations, . . . when you get to my page in your coloring book, . . . color me gone. I'm outta here. No way am I going to get my total future involved with a shooting I could have safely ignored.
Anyway, . . . that's how I see it, . . . given the parameters of the OP.
May God bless,
Dwight
If there were no other considerations, . . . when you get to my page in your coloring book, . . . color me gone. I'm outta here. No way am I going to get my total future involved with a shooting I could have safely ignored.
Anyway, . . . that's how I see it, . . . given the parameters of the OP.
May God bless,
Dwight
Some may think me bloodthirsty, but I don't believe response to an agressor is ever unjustified. If bad things occur because I respond to a BG's actions, the moral stain is on his cloth, not mine.
Vanya wrote:
I wouldn't kill over posessions either, but someone violating the sanctity of my home is placing himself in a situation where death is a possibility. If I shoot an invader, it isn't my fault. I did not put him in the perilous situation.
If a bank robber is being chased by police, and a bystander is killed, the bank robber is charged with murder, no matter who struck the bystander. The robber's actions set up the chain of events by which the innocent was killed. If I precipitate an action and someone dies, it's on me. My response to someone's agression, as long as it is appropriate and in context, not beating a downed man for example, leaves me in the moral clear.
Vanya wrote:
I wouldn't kill over posessions either, but someone violating the sanctity of my home is placing himself in a situation where death is a possibility. If I shoot an invader, it isn't my fault. I did not put him in the perilous situation.
If a bank robber is being chased by police, and a bystander is killed, the bank robber is charged with murder, no matter who struck the bystander. The robber's actions set up the chain of events by which the innocent was killed. If I precipitate an action and someone dies, it's on me. My response to someone's agression, as long as it is appropriate and in context, not beating a downed man for example, leaves me in the moral clear.
I think some here are debating past each other. There are two types of morality: Moral Absolutism and Moral Relativism.
Absolutism means that morals do not evolve. In this case a society or individual is judged based upon adherence to this absolute right and wrong standard. What is right is right, and can not change. For this to exist, something outside and above human society must set the rules. This requires a deity, or other outside force.
Relativism means that morality can and does change based upon the societal and temporal context. The problem with relativism are the questions "who makes the rules" and "who judges." Relativism leads to the abandonment of all absolute morality based upon the situation. No absolute can properly ajudicate all situations from a relativists point of view.
In a relativist world, both answers might be no, or they might be yes. The important thing is you really can't say, because the answer changes. In an absolutist world, things are more certain. Both questions have a correct answer that never changes, the important thing is against what scale are you judging?
Absolutism means that morals do not evolve. In this case a society or individual is judged based upon adherence to this absolute right and wrong standard. What is right is right, and can not change. For this to exist, something outside and above human society must set the rules. This requires a deity, or other outside force.
Relativism means that morality can and does change based upon the societal and temporal context. The problem with relativism are the questions "who makes the rules" and "who judges." Relativism leads to the abandonment of all absolute morality based upon the situation. No absolute can properly ajudicate all situations from a relativists point of view.
In a relativist world, both answers might be no, or they might be yes. The important thing is you really can't say, because the answer changes. In an absolutist world, things are more certain. Both questions have a correct answer that never changes, the important thing is against what scale are you judging?
kristop64089
New member
I voted retreat, as long as it was safe to do so.
I have no desire to be in a fire fight. I also have no desire to let some thug cause harm to me or mine. I will decide what is safe to me, no one else.
Legaly, it would be my word against evidence in the courts. Morally, I'd have to decide everynight, for the rest of my life if Had made the right decision. I have a very strong moral code, and if I saw that there was no safe retreat, then I would not hesitate, to commit to the situation at hand.
Everyone has there idea of what they will do when the time comes, I can tell ya', that all the "what if's" never play out like ya think, when the fuel is put on the fire.
In my case I chose to stand my ground, which backfired, because so did the BG. He must have had more to lose than I though. I hesitated(I was young), and good thing, because the BG, lowered his gun and ran away. If I had to do it all over, I believe I wouldn't have tried to make it back to my vehicle(where gun was), I would have just turned around and went back to the mall. Legally, I don't think I would have had a leg to dtand on, being there were other options at hand. Morally, I THOUGHT, I had made the right decision.
Anytime you an individual takes an offensive stance, you must be prepared to act. I wasn't(as I think many aren't) Different BG, or time of day, and I'd be a statistic, I didn't act!
I have no desire to be in a fire fight. I also have no desire to let some thug cause harm to me or mine. I will decide what is safe to me, no one else.
Legaly, it would be my word against evidence in the courts. Morally, I'd have to decide everynight, for the rest of my life if Had made the right decision. I have a very strong moral code, and if I saw that there was no safe retreat, then I would not hesitate, to commit to the situation at hand.
Everyone has there idea of what they will do when the time comes, I can tell ya', that all the "what if's" never play out like ya think, when the fuel is put on the fire.
In my case I chose to stand my ground, which backfired, because so did the BG. He must have had more to lose than I though. I hesitated(I was young), and good thing, because the BG, lowered his gun and ran away. If I had to do it all over, I believe I wouldn't have tried to make it back to my vehicle(where gun was), I would have just turned around and went back to the mall. Legally, I don't think I would have had a leg to dtand on, being there were other options at hand. Morally, I THOUGHT, I had made the right decision.
Anytime you an individual takes an offensive stance, you must be prepared to act. I wasn't(as I think many aren't) Different BG, or time of day, and I'd be a statistic, I didn't act!
Last edited:
rampage841512
New member
Responding to the OP only: it has always been my personal belief that a person should stop a criminal permanentely if given an opportunity. I came to this conclusion based on the twin facts that it conforms to my moral principles and is the most practical solution to crime.
This is a very Gray area and is going to depend on circumstances in home,car or business it's a definete NO RETREAT! On the street however we have to remember a CCW does not make us a cop, A CCW puts a tremendous amount of responsibility on our shoulders,to get involved in a shooting we have to weigh our decision of what is going to qualify as a justified shooting in what could be split seconds and that choice better be a good one or that bad guy could be laughing as our butt sits in jail and our loved ones loose everything due to the court cost's that ruin us! It would be the smartest thing in the world for all of us to try to remember to put some form of retreat format in our training so we automatically fall back on it's use if a sit rep every befalls us, it would only beneifit us in the long run to be able to show/document we tried to,retreat/break off/get away, but the bad guy kept the pursuit up, so we had no choice but to save our lives! a trail of your spent cartridges going backwards would certainly imply your intent to retreat even if it were just a few! That would go a long way in a court of law,little things count.Now don't take this out of context if a bg guy jumps out with a knife at your throat thrashing,this is a Immediate threat,like I said it all depends on the sit rep and as CCW holders we have tremendous responsibilities that we must make ourselves prepared for,most we don"t even think about,but should adapt for in our training
bababooey32
New member
csmss
Compared to me and my family's lives, yes it is just STUFF. Entering into a gun battle over said stuff, in my opinion, is not worth it if I have an easy escape with my life. As anyone who has been in a gunfight can tell you, the outcome is VERY uncertain. I'm not willing to risk my life over STUFF, if there is an escape route (even valuable and sentimental STUFF).
While you are correct that it is unknowable whether there is a BG waiting out the back door, it is equally unknowable if 3 or 4 bgs are coming in the front door, all with automatic weapons (see this video)...In any uncertain situation one has to make a split-second decision that takes him down the path of least resistance. Ultimately that decision may have to be reconsidered. If you find a BG out your back door, then you get your opportunity to protect your STUFF!
Compared to me and my family's lives, yes it is just STUFF. Entering into a gun battle over said stuff, in my opinion, is not worth it if I have an easy escape with my life. As anyone who has been in a gunfight can tell you, the outcome is VERY uncertain. I'm not willing to risk my life over STUFF, if there is an escape route (even valuable and sentimental STUFF).
While you are correct that it is unknowable whether there is a BG waiting out the back door, it is equally unknowable if 3 or 4 bgs are coming in the front door, all with automatic weapons (see this video)...In any uncertain situation one has to make a split-second decision that takes him down the path of least resistance. Ultimately that decision may have to be reconsidered. If you find a BG out your back door, then you get your opportunity to protect your STUFF!
- Status