Intervention Rule? - Page 5

Intervention Rule?

This is a discussion on Intervention Rule? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Rob72 Barring something like the Tacoma mall shootings, Luby's, etc., etc., where the BG is obviously a "BG", and intervention will clearly ...

View Poll Results: Intervention Rule?

378. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolute "For me and mine, ONLY!"

    12 3.17%
  • I'll NOT stand idly by.

    66 17.46%
  • Primarily "for me and mine," but may intervene under certain conditions.

    275 72.75%
  • I don't honestly know.

    25 6.61%
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 111

Thread: Intervention Rule?

  1. #61
    VIP Member
    Array BenGoodLuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob72
    Barring something like the Tacoma mall shootings, Luby's, etc., etc., where the BG is obviously a "BG", and intervention will clearly enhance/preserve the well-being/survival of others- "For me and mine, only".
    +1 and Amen!

  2. #62
    Senior Member Array elkhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Great thread!
    I voted #3 thinking we are talking deadly intervention. Now that I’ve read a little more, and in response to Betty & others, in the case of non-deadly (a 911 call, a little display, shouting or something) it’s a definite #2.
    The state of Colorado gives me permission to use deadly force if I reasonably perceive that myself, or someone else is in danger for my/their life. (That reasonably thing will be up to the jury of course.)

    My natural response to a perceived threat or danger is to leave the area to a safer place. I don’t know what I would do, if I saw a dangerous situation, I was alone, and left to go home and see “breaking news” of people murdered that I could have prevented. It might haunt me, although I have absolutely NO intentions of being a hero, nor am I an LE wannabe. I think I would at least make a 911 call on my way home. I’ve done things like that before.

    I have also thought to myself, while standing in line at the bank, “what if a bank robbery starts to go down now?” I figure, if the robbers want $$, they can have it and LE will catch up to them in time. I’m NOT going to draw and have my picture on the same tape with them ya know.
    Now if they start shooting in the air, probably still not.
    If they start shooting people, well now that is a BIG PROBLEM. If they are bad enough to shoot people for the loot, we are all dead and I’m not going without a fight.
    That’s my story & I’m sticking to it.
    It’s so much easier now days, to "Love and honor" my wife, when she is armed, and shoots a better group than I do. (Till death do us part, eh?)

    “The way you get shot by a concealed weapons permit holder is, you point a gun at him,” the Sheriff said.

  3. #63
    New Member Array GunnyBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Gainesville, Florida
    It was far different when I was in the service, and any lifer will tell you how difficult acclimating to a more passive stance in life can be. There were numerous occasions where a split second response was necessary and since the rules were relatively simple so was the reply. If an armed individual, or individuals, were threatening a fellow service member, or civilian, they were dispatched without hesitation. It is no longer my job to engage and offer a hard solution. I would protect my family and friends to the best of my ability, but understand that my entering the fray might very well result in injury or worse should they be in the path of return fire. There is no definitive response to this query, and you can do everything right and still have the situation turn out wrong.

  4. #64
    Senior Member Array madmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Spring Hill, FL

    Your statement, "There is no definitive response to this query," is exactly why I started this thread. I read one too many "I'd never get involved," or "You should never get involved," post and the sentiment just didn't sit well with me, as it was an "absolute."

    Having read a great deal on this Forum, I found it very hard to believe that people really would follow a "rule" like that, without exception. And sure enough, it now looks like most all qualify that "rule" with some form of exception.

    I was pretty sure that something other than icewater flowed in those veins, now I'm convinced of it.

    As for the rest of the quote from your post, "and you can do everything right and still have the situation turn out wrong," that is most certainly TRUE.

    You can also stand down, and just watch the situation turn out wrong.

    I kind of think you are the kind of person that just might decide against the latter, because even though the former "can turn out wrong," your actions could affect the outcome for the better.

    If the "sure thing" isn't good, tilt the odds if you can.

    I base that on reading post you've made here, and on another forum.

    Political Correctness has now "evolved" into Political Cowardice.

  5. #65
    1952 - 2006
    Array acparmed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Reading the recent posts made me think of one of the collaries to Murphy's Laws of Combat.

    "Anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing at all."
    Heroes are people who do what has to be done, when it has to be done, regardless of the consequences

    "I like when the enemy shoots at me; then I know where the ******** are and can kill them."
    ~George Patton


  6. #66
    Member Array sacp81170a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Farmington, AR
    I'm an LEO. I *can't* stand idly by.

  7. #67
    Administrative Ban Array Bruces45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Warrensburg, NY
    I voted #1, I may be in the minority, but unless its me or mine, they only get a phone call to 911. Sounds mean, but if i am not in harms way I'm not putting myself there for someone I don't know and love.

  8. #68
    New Member Array Curmudgeon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    I'm on the edge of 3/4, voted 4.

    I feel like I really won't know until I am in the situation.

  9. #69
    Senior Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    404 Page Not Found
    Welcome from North Texas, Curmudgeon1. Pop over to "New members" and intro yourself there too! Glad you're posting already!
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ: Buy These Stickers Here

    "A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon the world" Albert Camus

  10. #70
    Member Array cray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Quote Originally Posted by madmike
    OK, maybe I'm the only one who has "problems" reading threads about getting involved in a situation that involves perceived threats to other than ourselves or family members.

    I'd like to get a better idea of how people really feel about this. This time, I will NOT argue my views, but sit back quietly and learn from others.

    No specific scenario, just the broad picture of seeing another individual (a total stranger,) being threatened with what you perceive to be a credible threat to their life, or at the least, a credible threat of serious bodily harm.

    What I want to know is, do you personally have a policy of

    1. Absolutely "For me and mine, ONLY."
    2. "I will NOT stand idly by"
    3. Primarily "me and mine," but may intervene under some conditions.
    4. I honestly do not know.

    If you want to explain you choice, feel free to do so. I will NOT argue against you, as that's what I'm trying to avoid. I'd rather understand you.
    I came here to post a very similar question, but decided to search first .. fortunately.

    I voted #3, and I haven't read a single post in this thread, but will get through every one tonight.

    I'm sure that in a situation which could go bad very fast, possibly faster than I can contain it, I will probably act before I should in order to INSURE my family's safety. I do believe after all, that's why I was put in this earth. Knowing that my family is safe, and I acted in good faith, even if I was wrong ... well, let's just say I can live with that MUCH better than I could live with containing the situation AFTER a familiy member was harmed.

    The second half, is much harder ... since every situation is different. I fall back to my reason for being here ... I've got to take care of my family, and even a good shoot can go bad in court, which could deprive me of that ability. And, we all know that noble intentions can get you killed. If my family was present and a situation arose, their safety has got to be first so ... that would be insured before I assisted anyone else.

    My "protective inclination" tends to go out toward children and the elderly, with grown, healthy men & woman a distant second. In my mind, they at least have the ability to defend themselves if they so choose ... the elderly and children may not have those options.

    I won't shoot in defense of someone's property or money. And, even if someone broke into my home, if he was stealing only property AND I have the tactical advantage, he'd get a pass. If however the situation was highly dynamic .. low light, unknown # of BGs, near my kids' rooms, etc., then I won't hestitate to do what I was put here to do. And, again, if there was ANY question in my mind ... front sight, preeessssssssss. I will always err on the side of caution when I KNOW I'm right.

    Luby's Cafeteria: .. I'm afraid the first person would have died. But if there was anything I could do about it, that would be it.

    My two cents folks ...


  11. #71
    Member Array BlackJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Primarilly me and mine. I carry a cell phone so I will call 911 first. Then depending on the circumstances I will make a decision AFTER contacting, or at least attempting to contact, 911. The only acception I can think of is that I don't think I could stand by and watch a small child being abused or hurt.

  12. #72
    Member Array Eddie A.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Arlington, Texas
    Primarily "for me and mine," but may intervene under certain conditions is my vote

    My concealed carry is primarily for me and mine, but as a decent human being, I don't think I could or would just stand by and watch as someone elses life was being threatened by some BG. That being said, when you see what you perceive is a threat to someone else, you better make darn sure that the situation is what it seems Before you draw your weapon. If you're not sure then be a good witness and call 911 immediately.
    "I'd rather have my gun and not need it, than need it and not have it"

  13. #73
    Member Array Blackhawk6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    I'll go with option #3.

    Quote Originally Posted by chiefs-special-guy
    St Augustine solved this problem for me about 1600 yrs ago- so-called "Just War" theory. You may intervene,and you should, when 1. there is imminent danger to the innocent;2. intervention with force is the only effective choice; 3. you use proportionate force, sufficient to stop the attack, but not gratuitous punishment;4. there is a reasonable chance of success; believe you will do more good than bad, where the lives of aggressors are not counted as worthless, but are due less weight than innocent persons.
    Minor correction. The Just War Theory was profferred by Saint Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologicae not Saint Augustine.

  14. #74
    Senior Member Array Timmy Jimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Austin, Texas
    I have not read anyone else reply yet but here is mine:

    Of the four choices

    1. Absolutely "For me and mine, ONLY."
    2. "I will NOT stand idly by"
    3. Primarily "me and mine," but may intervene under some conditions.
    4. I honestly do not know.

    I have to pick two of them. I would like to think number 2 is the right answer for me.

    As a Christian it is our responsibility to help others, mostly those that can not help themselves (notice I said can not help themselves not refuse to help themselves).

    As a retired soldier I still have the mindset of protecting innocents against all enemies foreign and domestic.

    As a father I can not expect other to protect my family if I am not around, if I don't protect yours when you are not around.

    This is the greatest country on earth and we all need to make sure it stays that way and that is why I have a CHL, to protect and serve my fellow humans.

    The second answer has to be number 4 I just don't know and I hope I never have to find out. Until that time comes when I have to draw my Kimber and pull the trigger to kill another human being we just never know.
    Timmy Jimmy

    If it is not in the US Constitution then the Federal Government should not be doing it.

    "Carrying a gun is a social responsibility."

  15. #75
    Senior Member
    Array Baby Hulk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    No surprises, I chose # 3 and as echoed constantly here: it depends on the situation.

    Great replies and posts on this thread!
    It's not about the caliber you carry, it's about how you USE it.

    Acts 4:12
    (Mohammad Who?)

    1988 DIE HARD 2008
    NRA Member

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. Divine Intervention???
    By oneshot in forum Bob & Terry's Place
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: January 10th, 2010, 09:48 PM
  2. the dangers of intervention
    By seawolf1956 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: April 20th, 2009, 11:28 AM
  3. How Many Of Y'all See THIS As The First Step To UN Intervention....HERE?
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: June 25th, 2006, 11:25 PM
  4. Intervention v. Non-Intervention
    By Miggy in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: October 20th, 2005, 10:46 PM