Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,154 Posts
One problem is that who the good guys are and who bad guys are is not all that clear anymore. The cops are the good guys, except when they're not. Republicans are the good guys, except for the half of them that are RINOs and/or will sell us out to make a deal. You see people walking down the street during the day and they pretty much all look the same, but some of them are antisocial psychos. Who do you use overwhelming force against?

Sure, when people are rioting, we should use major force against them. I am all for that. But they will be replaced by a new crowd the next night. If all these problems were as simple as good guys and bad guys, we'd have it solved by now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
If we end up using lethal force, which will need to happen in some places because the police are not stopping things, then there will be fewer people to riot. Sure, there will always be more idiots making bad choices, but there comes a point when the people being violent now need to meet equal or greater violence.

Clarity isn't all that important when it comes to dealing with a mob when things deteriorate to the point that the final option gets used. For lethal force is the last option to use after all other options fail. The longer the riots go on, the less effective non-lethal methods will be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
It is a platitude and an easy re-tweet. I am sure there are scenarios where, who the good guys are is pretty clear and probably widely agreed on. Rioters and looters are not good guys. But, as passing comments go, Sexton follows a common theme: say something that sounds reasonable, until the devil and the details collide.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,854 Posts
Yep. I think he is right and it will most likely end up coming to that in the long run.

But jmf552 is right also; the lines between good guys and bad guys are pretty blurred at times. Though I suspect if we ignore those times and just go after the times the line is clear cut we will still clean up a lot of this mess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
Easy to see the good and bad guys.
If you are a good guy, do not stand with the bad guys. leave the scene, if you choose to stay and enjoy the show you may not like the door prize.
In terms of making bad choices, standing near the bad guys is a bad choice, but it does not necessarily make you a bad guy. A good guy shooting a guy standing near a bad guy, may end up charged as a bad guy.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
886 Posts
If we end up using lethal force, which will need to happen in some places because the police are not stopping things, then there will be fewer people to riot. Sure, there will always be more idiots making bad choices, but there comes a point when the people being violent now need to meet equal or greater violence.

Clarity isn't all that important when it comes to dealing with a mob when things deteriorate to the point that the final option gets used. For lethal force is the last option to use after all other options fail. The longer the riots go on, the less effective non-lethal methods will be.
The force need not be lethal. What ever happened to fire hoses for riot control?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
Bad Guys????? To paraphrase Dirty Harry " When I see someone rioting, looting, burning and attacking other citizens; I don't figure they are out collecting for the Red Cross!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
The force need not be lethal. What ever happened to fire hoses for riot control?
I often thought the same back when the Ferguson problems started and people were blocking the streets and highways. Flushing the streets is what I called them, i think that would be the best tool for these days too and for not only quenching the fire that flows through one's heart and mind but also for putting the little fires they start.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,413 Posts
In terms of making bad choices, standing near the bad guys is a bad choice, but it does not necessarily make you a bad guy. A good guy shooting a guy standing near a bad guy, may end up charged as a bad guy.
Bad analogy my friend. If you are a bystander in a one on one shooting and get hit it is one thing,
But if you are in the middle of a riot, and the police warn everyone to disperse and you do not, you are no longer an innocent bystander, a good guy would have the sense to get out of harm's way.
Sometimes you do not get a second chance to not be an idiot.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,374 Posts
One problem is that who the good guys are and who bad guys are is not all that clear anymore. The cops are the good guys, except when they're not. Republicans are the good guys, except for the half of them that are RINOs and/or will sell us out to make a deal. You see people walking down the street during the day and they pretty much all look the same, but some of them are antisocial psychos. Who do you use overwhelming force against?

Sure, when people are rioting, we should use major force against them. I am all for that. But they will be replaced by a new crowd the next night. If all these problems were as simple as good guys and bad guys, we'd have it solved by now.
Very simple really. Incoming fire is bad. Outgoing fire is good. It really is that simple.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,374 Posts
It’s a war of ideologies. They are winning. Arrest them, prosecute them, and incarcerate them. You’ll end up with 20 more by the time they’re sentence is served.

No sir, this is war. Time for authorities to grow a pair and start killing. Time to put a 1 billion dollar bounty on Soros.

If authorities don’t do what is necessary soon, we are looking at a violent civil war in our streets. We may also face martial law very soon. It is that bad folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,034 Posts
Bad analogy my friend. If you are a bystander in a one on one shooting and get hit it is one thing,
But if you are in the middle of a riot, and the police warn everyone to disperse and you do not, you are no longer an innocent bystander, a good guy would have the sense to get out of harm's way.
Sometimes you do not get a second chance to not be an idiot.
Ah . . . the old reading of the Riot Act ploy, eh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,154 Posts
Very simple really. Incoming fire is bad. Outgoing fire is good. It really is that simple.
So if someone is shooting at you, no matter what you have done, they are bad? And if you are shooting at someone who didn't deserve it, you are still good? And those other people don't have the the right to feel you are bad?

You might say, "I would never do anything bad, and I would never shoot at someone who didn't deserve it." But most of the people who may shoot at you might feel the same way about themselves. They have rationalized their own morality. So for me, I think a higher standard of good and bad is needed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,374 Posts
So if someone is shooting at you, no matter what you have done, they are bad? And if you are shooting at someone who didn't deserve it, you are still good? And those other people don't have the the right to feel you are bad?

You might say, "I would never do anything bad, and I would never shoot at someone who didn't deserve it." But most of the people who may shoot at you might feel the same way about themselves. They have rationalized their own morality. So for me, I think a higher standard of good and bad is needed.
Read the whole post. This is a war. Somebody hell bent on looting, burning, beating, killing targeting me. Damn straight they are bad guys and I’m in the right. If some poor “he was a good boy” is standing next to the other one, still a good shoot. Disparity of force in a riot is a given.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,154 Posts
Read the whole post. This is a war. Somebody hell bent on looting, burning, beating, killing targeting me. Damn straight they are bad guys and I’m in the right. If some poor “he was a good boy” is standing next to the other one, still a good shoot. Disparity of force in a riot is a given.
I get that, it was a rhetorical argument, not meant to offend. But I did read your whole post. It was that one linee I quoted. I was reacting to that.

But permit me to respectfully take the argument further in the direction you were going. In this situation, a lot of the people out there are protesters exercising their 1A rights, not at all looting, burning, beating, killing or targeting you. It's OK that a "good boy" exercising that freedom gets shot? Because in a lot of these situations, they are all mixed together.

And regarding disparity of force being a determining factor: What if it is a different riot, one where gun owners are reacting to gun confiscation? Does that change good and bad?

Again, I am just making rhetorical arguments because I find them interesting. I am not shading you personally.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
715 Posts
I think if a good guy has made the poor choice to stand with a rioter destroying property and hurting people, whatever comes his way shouldn't be a surprise. That is unfortunate, but it is the result of his choices. That being said, it is time to act decisively. Appeals to conscience, etc, are lost on those who are caught up in this no-cost do anything party that we've allowed to grow unchecked.

Yes, it is inconceivable that it has come to this, but it is time. When those doing the damage start receiving damage, the damage will end. Then, it's time to hunt down those who financed and worked to incite this mess and facilitated the use of misguided fools to do their dirty work.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,374 Posts
I get that, it was a rhetorical argument, not meant to offend. But I did read your whole post. It was that one sentence I quoted. I was reacting to that.

But permit me to respectfully take the argument further in the direction you were going. In this situation, a lot of the people out there are protesters exercising their 1A rights, not at all looting, burning, beating, killing or targeting you. It's OK that a "good boy" exercising that freedom gets shot? Because in a lot of these situations, they are all mixed together.

And regarding disparity of force being a determining factor: What if it is a different riot, one where gun owners are reacting to gun confiscation? Does that change good and bad?

Again, I am just making rhetorical arguments because I find them interesting. I am not shading you personally.
Appreciate the clarification.

On the first point when violence and rioting break out an event ceases to be a protest. Several days into it and the occurrences are clearly not protests. I’m all for protesting. Peacefully. Gandhi changed a nation and an empire. He did so peacefully. He did not loot. He did not destroy property. He did not commit acts of arson.

To the other point gun owners are not a problem. Look at Virginia in Richmond. No violence. Look at the firearms confiscated during Katrina. No violence. Look at the citizens in the riots whose firearms were confiscated. No violence.

The topic is irrelevant. This is about the wicked. Some might call it racist but the truth hurts and it’s not racist. It is beyond belief that a bunch of folks get butt hurt over some guy they didn’t know or care about. A guy they would not have stopped and helped on the street had he been homeless. But they will take any opportunity to get their lazy behinds out of the free housing to go and loot. To burn. To destroy. When you haven’t worked a day in your life, when you are a bum, you can’t possibly understand the value of anything. It’s all free. So why not take what belongs to someone else. Why not take their life too. After all, you just took their livelihood when the store burned down.

This is about society, rules, and order. America has big problems right now especially with ideology and lack of leadership at many levels. This is big. It is well organized. It is well funded. And it has a purpose. Folks better decide real quick lay down or pick up a weapon and stand ready. They are coming for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Recon1342 and SFury
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top