sheep dogs and mall shooters....My opinion.

[oknow]

I have never sought permission to defend myself or how I do it...

if your right there then yes defend yourself but if you head into the problem then you are not defending yourself.

 

[dmancornell]

I am fine with someone running away from the threat but someone telling me I should not stand and fight... That's where I take exception. I will fight if I choose, despite my only having a squirt gun...

I wasn't telling you to not fight, I was objecting to this obnoxious attitude that CC holders and cops have about being "sheep dogs". Actually with cops it's also insulting since we pay them to steal and imprison instead of protecting.

Feel free to stand and fight, just hope the shooter is within 10 yards, otherwise good luck with the headshot on a moving target with all your adrenaline pumping and the noise and pandemonium.

 

[shooter58]

Feel free to stand and fight, just hope the shooter is within 10 yards, otherwise good luck with the headshot on a moving target with all your adrenaline pumping and the noise and pandemonium.

Exactly! And I appreciate the good luck gesture. It has helped me in the past.
Within 10 yards!! You over estimate my ability...
Oh and thanks for your permission to stand and fight.

 

[shooter58]

Feel free to stand and fight, just hope the shooter is within 10 yards, otherwise good luck with the headshot on a moving target with all your adrenaline pumping and the noise and pandemonium.

I dont just fight when I know I can win. I fight when I know I'm right.

 

[davemata]

It's my opinion....and mostly likely the same opinion as every LEO in the country.

So you speak for all LEO?

 

[kev1]

This reminds me of the discusion on the theater shooting. Similar thoughts on taking a stand or engaging. Very interesting all the points of view. I am in the camp of trying to get my family out safe. Engaging if I am a table away and escape is not a option. I must admit going against 30 round mags with my kimber does worry me.

 

[Bigfoot]

Sure would be nice if we could save all this 'any views that are different than mine are invalid' BS for another time and subject.

Edit: Figured I'd come back and put that into words that some here could comprehend...

Stop hating!

Celebrate diversity.........of opinion!

 

[shooter58]

I guess posting a big picture works when you run out of rational argument

 

[Bam]

Tell that to the people who's lives were saved by an ordinary citizen with a CHL that chose to intervene.

You might be a coward and flee, but that doesn't mean everyone else is a coward.

CHL holder intervined and prevented an active shooter who had an AK from killing anyone else at that moment, saved lives...
http://m.kltv.com/autojuice?targetUrl=http://www.kltv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2994393&nav=1TjBWmXB

The real irony is you calling anyone a sheep when you said you would run yourself... you're the sheep.

 

[Boomerang]

I have some experience turning on a predator. 100% of the time when the perceived prey turns on the predator, the predator has a momentary complete mental shutdown as they try to make sense of what is happening. I have used that advantage more than once and count that as one of my top weapons along with my gun.

Elaborate please. (Maybe some examples, possible scenario, etc)

 

[Botte Hork]

.... and body armor.

Is that confirmed by LE, or are we talking stressed eyewitnesses who can't tell a 10/22 takedown from an AR15 that saw the shooter run past with a black sweater or something from the "tacticool" 5.11/blackhawk catalog in black/olive drab/digicamo?

 

[dmancornell]

Is that confirmed by LE, or are we talking stressed eyewitnesses who can't tell a 10/22 takedown from an AR15 that saw the shooter run past with a black sweater or something from the "tacticool" 5.11/blackhawk catalog in black/olive drab/digicamo?

Saw it in the news. It's probably BS. Using an AR-15 already gave him a massive edge over anyone with a CCW, with or without body armor.

 

[kev1]

There now reporting no body armor. Just a fancy vest. Also the mall has signs...gun free zone. For those of us who would risk our safty to follow a rule set by the MALL. I do wonder how many people in that mall if not for the signs would have cc.

 

[DuneHopper]

Yes, my guess is that it was the “Call of Duty” crowd fleeing at the first sign of trouble…

Yep very possible, but owning a gun and knowing how and when to use it are two different things.

I want to be real clear on my position on this, gun owners are not police and are not protected by the law if you decide to go all vigilante'.

1. you have the right to carry a gun
2. you have the right to defend yourself.

You do not have the right to decide in a place of business to play judge jury and executioner,
it is not your call to make. Unless you like a few years in prison playing gumby and pokey for
manslaughter if you can not prove it was justified. And going after a person and not retreating if you can will
make the difference. Its simple you have to be attacked not be the attacker and you are good to go.
Start chasing BG around a mall and you gonna get a 5x9 cell

Alone, at home, or cornered then by all means put the hurt on em.

 

[DuneHopper]

There now reporting no body armor. Just a fancy vest. Also the mall has signs...gun free zone. For those of us who would risk our safty to follow a rule set by the MALL. I do wonder how many people in that mall if not for the signs would have cc.

Great point, if I was under attack I would want to carry. Wonder if the people under attack had their guns in their cars?

 

[WhyteCheddar]

Somebody objected to the term 'sheepdog'.
IMHO, if you carry, then in certain situations you are a sheepdog.
While I stated earlier that everyone may hope that they would respond in a certain way in a given situation, but nobody really knows how they will react unless they actually are presented with said situation, I think clear thinking folks can agree that there are right and wrong ways to respond. In the eyes of the law, you are on tenous ground if you have an avenue of escape and you choose instead to fight. In any case, it is always up to a jury. But the real judge is your conscience.
There are those who wouldn't lift a finger to help others, and there are those who would never have another nights restful sleep knowing they could of done some good and didn't. I think deep inside everyone knows what category they fall into.

 

[shooter58]

Yep very possible, but owning a gun and knowing how and when to use it are two different things.

I want to be real clear on my position on this, gun owners are not police and are not protected by the law if you decide to go all vigilante'.

1. you have the right to carry a gun
2. you have the right to defend yourself.

You do not have the right to decide in a place of business to play judge jury and executioner,
it is not your call to make. Unless you like a few years in prison playing gumby and pokey for
manslaughter if you can not prove it was justified. And going after a person and not retreating if you can will
make the difference. Its simple you have to be attacked not be the attacker and you are good to go.
Start chasing BG around a mall and you gonna get a 5x9 cell

Alone, at home, or cornered then by all means put the hurt on em.

So if like others in the mall that day, my gun was in the car instead of on me, and I decided to take action against the gunman anyway (not sure how but lets say i did)I guess that presents a whole new set of rules.

 

[Beefcake]

Yep very possible, but owning a gun and knowing how and when to use it are two different things.

I want to be real clear on my position on this, gun owners are not police and are not protected by the law if you decide to go all vigilante'.

1. you have the right to carry a gun
2. you have the right to defend yourself.

You do not have the right to decide in a place of business to play judge jury and executioner,
it is not your call to make. Unless you like a few years in prison playing gumby and pokey for
manslaughter if you can not prove it was justified. And going after a person and not retreating if you can will
make the difference. Its simple you have to be attacked not be the attacker and you are good to go.
Start chasing BG around a mall and you gonna get a 5x9 cell

Alone, at home, or cornered then by all means put the hurt on em.

I'm not an attorney, but my understanding of the law is that any citizen has the right to use physical force, including deadly physical force, in defense of another person under certain circumstances. ORS 161.219 doesn't say that you can't defend another person if you have the opportunity to run away. Here is the actual law:

161.209 Use of physical force in defense of a person. Except as provided in ORS 161.215 and 161.219, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]



161.210 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]



161.215 Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:

(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that person; or

(2) The person is the initial aggressor, except that the use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force; or

(3) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law. [1971 c.743 §24]



161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or

(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or

(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

 

[lamrith]

If you are within range,you and yours are in danger,weather he sees you or not. Bullets go though tables and plants and chairs. The ones you would be hiding behind to save your own a$$

And as far as the cops shooting you,wouldn't you have your gun holstered by then?

THIS is the point people fail to realize. Fact of the matter is that if you are even remotely close to him, he is a threat to you. He does not have to see you, know you are there or anything, if he shots your direction, unless you are behind a brick/concrete item, you can be hit. For that matter so can the wife and kids with you, maybe even after his round goes thru you as you shield your loved ones trying to get to safety...

If you are within range to engage him and have the means to do so it is in your best interest to do so, it is not heroism glory seeking, it is you protecting your own life.

And yes I would agree you should be holstered before they arrive, but reality of the situation is, they MAY just get there while things are still going down. You will also likely be in a state of shock/disbelief and still have your weapon drawn and on the guy.

 

[Russianfist]

So you speak for all LEO?

Do you always troll with silly questions?........Make your point Dave.

If you feel that I am under qualified to make my statments, you would be incorrect in making that assumption.
I won't go in to detail here but I will be more than willing to clarify that for you offline.