I think the mindset is different for 'what works' and what doesn't.
Could be. Although I tend to think in mechanical terms: switch A goes into tab B the same way in German, or English. Guns is guns, and the laws of physics apply no matter what the jurisdiction is.
You have been taught by the same media (and real life?) that you have no choice.
The latter. Though it's by the Grace of God that the single time I did draw my weapon that I was not compelled to use it.
In other words - he put his hands right up in the air.
I think you have a choice but you are taught not to even consider it; is that a possibility?
I believe you mis-understood.
You are not _forced_ to use your weapon if it comes out of the holster. But one never draws it as a threat, without intending to shoot. You deploy the weapon only if deadly force is warranted.
I'm curious as to the way I was raised and have lived and the way you were.
Middle class suburbs of Oklahoma. Then I joined the Marines for eight years, did some time at a Navy base where we had top secret clearance and got a lot of classes on how and when to use deadly force.
even the reactions from non-EU give me the feeling there is something just very different in your attitude towards 'shooting people'. The 'no other choice' thing is very strange to me.
The US - as you know - is a big place. Lots of room for cultural differences. A guy from California, who never handled a firearm outside of a video game is going to have a much different attitude than a guy from the midwest who is comfortable and familiar with 'guns'.
Worth repeating: it's not that one does not have a choice, but that one should never, ever, never deploy a weapon unless the circumstnances justify killing. You can always -not- shoot, but recongize that pulling it from it's holster is only done under dire circumstances.
A gun is a tool, is all. A very, very specialized tool.
Another way to put it - and this might be a money-grubbing attitude unique to Americans - is to internalize that -if- one deploys a firearm as a civilian one should expect to pay out $20,000 bucks minimum. That's the average legal bill a guy faces if he shoots someone in the US.
> Another way to put it - and this might be a money-grubbing attitude unique to Americans - is to internalize that -if- one deploys a firearm as a civilian one should expect to pay out $20,000 bucks minimum. That's the average legal bill a guy faces if he shoots someone in the US.
Wow :) That's really interesting to put it like that. I didn't know that. But police would have a different outlook on that right?
Could be. Although I tend to think in mechanical terms: switch A goes into tab B the same way in German, or English. Guns is guns, and the laws of physics apply no matter what the jurisdiction is.
You have been taught by the same media (and real life?) that you have no choice.
The latter. Though it's by the Grace of God that the single time I did draw my weapon that I was not compelled to use it.
In other words - he put his hands right up in the air.
I think you have a choice but you are taught not to even consider it; is that a possibility?
I believe you mis-understood.
You are not _forced_ to use your weapon if it comes out of the holster. But one never draws it as a threat, without intending to shoot. You deploy the weapon only if deadly force is warranted.
I'm curious as to the way I was raised and have lived and the way you were.
Middle class suburbs of Oklahoma. Then I joined the Marines for eight years, did some time at a Navy base where we had top secret clearance and got a lot of classes on how and when to use deadly force.
even the reactions from non-EU give me the feeling there is something just very different in your attitude towards 'shooting people'. The 'no other choice' thing is very strange to me.
The US - as you know - is a big place. Lots of room for cultural differences. A guy from California, who never handled a firearm outside of a video game is going to have a much different attitude than a guy from the midwest who is comfortable and familiar with 'guns'.
Worth repeating: it's not that one does not have a choice, but that one should never, ever, never deploy a weapon unless the circumstnances justify killing. You can always -not- shoot, but recongize that pulling it from it's holster is only done under dire circumstances.
A gun is a tool, is all. A very, very specialized tool.
Another way to put it - and this might be a money-grubbing attitude unique to Americans - is to internalize that -if- one deploys a firearm as a civilian one should expect to pay out $20,000 bucks minimum. That's the average legal bill a guy faces if he shoots someone in the US.