Am I being selfish?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    Had an interesting discussion after church today. Long and short of it is some believe that as legal carriers there is some quasi obligation to address evil should the need arise. For me I have a very short list of people I will defend. First order of business is getting my family out of harms way. Am I the only one that feels this way or did I miss something?
     

    Lebowski

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jun 6, 2013
    2,724
    63
    Between corn and soybean fields.
    Well, in a 'perfect' world I think coming to the defense of others is ideal but in the 'real world' of lawyers I'd rather just protect me and my own.

    But with that said: Who knows. I don't think it's a selfish thought. It'd be foolish to think or claim that you're gonna be a hero of any potential bad situation just because you carry. I don't think anyone really knows what exactly they're going to do until put in a situation where they're forced to decide.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    "Address evil?" Seems a little too vague of a criterion to me, for attaching the label "selfish" to someone. I thought I read about some bikers who volunteered to go overseas and fight ISIS. Good on them! But as for me, I'm still sitting here, typing on a computer. Being selfish, I guess. Everybody has to draw the line somewhere.

    But remember, the world is full of "good boys" who were just getting ready to "start college." It's hard to make perfect decisions when it hits the fan, and sometimes, not even a Police Union is good enough to help you if you're on the wrong side of that invisible line.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    It sounds to me like the core subject-matter of that discussion could be the root of a number of different arguments. At least in Indiana, there is no legal obligation, unlike Texas, for example, where licensed carriers are required by law to assist law enforcement officers. The next stop is both sides of the coin with a moral obligation or lack thereof, which allows for great variation in mileage depending on one's general and specific views, not dissimilar with general notions of charity.

    The questions I see:

    1. Are you morally obligated to defend another person just because he/she/it is not capable of effectively defending himself?
    2. How do you account for the reasons for the conflict (i.e., did the person taking the worst of it just happen to be a criminal's target of choice, or did he start something he couldn't finish, leading to 'does getting your ass handed to you automatically make you a victim')?
    3. How do you account for disparities between the two or more parties involved (i.e., 250 pound man knocking the hell out of a 110 pound woman, or maybe they are about the same size, maybe one is old and infirmed, maybe a child being attacked by an adult)?
    4. On the other side of the same coin, how do you account for the potentially existing entitlement mentality I hear perhaps coming out? Is this person suggesting that because he/she/it chooses not to make provision for defending himself/herself/itself, then you somehow are obligated to protect him/her/it from his/her/its own poor planning or outright stupidity?
    5. How much risk can you be reasonably expected to take (both physical and legal) in order to protect someone else, perhaps someone you don't know, and perhaps without knowing the answers to some or any of the previous questions?
    6. Where do you draw the lines between indifference toward others, believing you probably should act, believing you definitely should act, being morally obligated to act, and stepping squarely into the realm of wild-ass vigilantism, perhaps without knowing a fraction of what you would need to know in order to make an informed decision on whether you really should act or not?

    I am going to say that for my purposes, I could see myself coming up with a variety of different answers depending on the specifics at hand at a given time. I don't see myself watching someone snatch a kid or a rapist dragging a woman into an alley, but on the other hand, if I rather doubt that I would intervene without being absolutely sure of the situation I was contemplating injecting myself into.
     

    maxmayhem

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    71   0   0
    Nov 16, 2010
    2,162
    38
    Ocala, FL (for now)
    i think you should not feel obligated to intervene but if you understand the situation from start to finish then you can...do you know without a doubt that if you use deadly force that you are using deadly force on a perpetrator and not a person responding to a perpetrator...can you do so without endangering your own safety...can you live with your own inaction? this is not a bravado question but a morality question.
     

    wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    Address evil?" Seems a little too vague of a criterion to me, for attaching the label "selfish" to someone. I thought I read about some bikers who volunteered to go overseas and fight ISIS. Good on them! But as for me, I'm still sitting here, typing on a computer. Being selfish, I guess. Everybody has to draw the line somewhere.

    To put in context. For instance an attack at our church. Specifically a terrorist with a gun. My short list consist of my wife and son. I am not saying I would not help someone in distress. But it would only be after I was 100% aware of what was happening. I would not intervene where someone brought it on themselves. Not my circus not my monkey.

    I guess it would be a different story if I were to volunteer to help with security. But just because I am there not so much.
     

    jbombelli

    ITG Certified
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    May 17, 2008
    13,010
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    So people who refuse to carry are assigning some obligation as to their safety and well-being to you?

    That sounds self-centered and selfish to me.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    I think we all have an obligation to make the world a better place, within our means and our capabilities. Carrying a gun doesn't change that duty, it simply adds more options.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    I think we all have an obligation to make the world a better place, within our means and our capabilities. Carrying a gun doesn't change that duty, it simply adds more options.

    Is it fair to assume that 'within our capabilities' includes knowing without a significant doubt what is in fact better (i.e., who, if anyone, needs a lead deficiency cured)?
     

    wcd

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 2, 2011
    6,274
    113
    Off the Grid In Tennessee
    I would ask whomever you were conversing with why they chose to rely on you to defend them?



    This is going to sound awful......Lazyness about somes it up. They don't want to make an investment of time or money.
    For me I spend a fair amount of time practicing anywhere from 2-3 hours a week between dry fire and range time.

    Again not saying I don't care about people but reality of it is my family is more important to me then someone that wont take responsibility for their own safety.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    A lot of things I agree with in this thread. My own spin is that I'm not pulling the trigger as a third party to a situation without explicit knowledge that it is justified. A robber pulling a gun on a gas station clerk is a little more cut and dried than a scuffle in the street with one side getting the worst of it. A lot of cops have gotten pretty scratched up while helping a girl who turned on them in a domestic violence incident. I'm more than happy to help someone, but I won't be dumb about it. I don't see that as selfish. As far as a MWAG in the church, I'll probably be up front anyway, not near the family. The way the church is laid out I will have the best shot anyway. I've resigned myself to the fact that the quickest way out of the situation, and the safest for my family, is to leave them be and address the situation directly. Thankfully the odds are very slim this will ever happen.
     

    churchmouse

    I still care....Really
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    187   0   0
    Dec 7, 2011
    191,809
    152
    Speedway area
    I think we all have an obligation to make the world a better place, within our means and our capabilities. Carrying a gun doesn't change that duty, it simply adds more options.

    Bingo.
    Every situation is different. If I failed to act and an innocent paid for my lack of action I am sure I could not live with myself.
    If it were a child there would be no hesitation.
     

    chuckp

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 22, 2009
    452
    28
    Central IN
    You have to ask yourself if you can handle a lawsuit financially. There are anti-gun attorneys out there just itching to sue if the bad guy's family wants to. Even if you are morally right it could possibly bankrupt you and destroy your family. Protect only what you absolutely have to.

    Having been in a self-defense shooting and then a lawsuit its no fun and it wastes years of your life.
     

    Ruffnek

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    You have to ask yourself if you can handle a lawsuit financially. There are anti-gun attorneys out there just itching to sue if the bad guy's family wants to. Even if you are morally right it could possibly bankrupt you and destroy your family. Protect only what you absolutely have to.

    Having been in a self-defense shooting and then a lawsuit its no fun and it wastes years of your life.
    I'd really like to see a thread about your story. We rarely get to hear about an actual event and the aftermath.

    If you don't want to, I understand.
     

    HKUSP

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    496
    43
    Danville, IN
    I think whomever tried to pull you into a philosophical discussion about this and make it as simple as "addressing evil" simply hasn't thought about it enough. Not every situation you would run into is a textbook scenario. Trying to get all gun owners to agree on one thing is generally like herding cats. Then, file that down to those that choose to carry and you find that there are a lot of different reasons why someone would choose to do so. Most of those reasons would not be adopting the notion that they're heading out into a dangerous world to right wrongs and protect the innocent. I bet the majority of carriers do so out of self preservation for themselves and their family. That's not selfish. That's one of the very basic laws of nature, and quite proper.

    Chris
     
    Top Bottom