“The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.” ― George S. Patton Jr.
“To die for one’s beliefs is indeed a noble touch
To live for them is better and it doesn’t hurt as much” ― Terence Chua
Once you become a casualty, you are a liability to your family. They have to choose between escaping and trying to save you. So not becoming a casualty isn’t just a good idea, it’s an obligation to your dependents. Prepare for such eventualities as may be mitigated by prompt action. While the men who shielded their girlfriends from bullets in Aurora, CO are heroes, they’d have been happier being live heroes. Pity they would have had to break local laws to survive.
Interesting. I’d leave off the “be a hero” section, more of a “take responsibility for your own safety” thing, but that’s a wee bit too long. I like the concept, and the picture of the guy with the baby is excellent.
Nice work as usual, sir. 🙂
I’m with David. Anti-gunners already believe that anybody who carries a gun (except for cops, they get a free magical pass for some reason) is a fearful, coward, wanna-be-hero, racist, hateful, violent, ect… person. We don’t need to give them any low hanging fruit on our terminology.
I really dig the provocative message and imagery though. You are speaking truth, truth which 99% of our nation never has to be faced with, me included! I try to be situationally aware, but I’m thankful as hell that I’ve never actually had to fight for my life.
I’d really like to share this on my facebook page but I don’t really want to put it up there with “hero”, can you make an alternate version? I don’t mean to try to control your work or your message, I’m just trying to contextualize for my super-lefty facebook friends. Also, hero truly is the correct word – but Americans today are so far from having any sort of reference for what that word actually means…
Good stuff as always Oleg… you do important work.
Change “hero” to “survivor,” and it would be a lot harder for an anti-gun lefty to argue with as being some jingoist macho thing.
Uh. “Survivalist?”
Hero’s good for me.
I try to explain to the anti-gun folks that at that moment you are in a crappy choice between a shootout and a massacre. Given that, I’ll take shootout every time.
I think it was the immortal Cooper that said.
“An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity”
Local laws? Is that because state law requires people to obey private property victim disarmament restrictions?
For a libertarian it’s hard to argue against the right of a property owner to set such restrictions. But there is an obvious answer.
It is time for an all out boycott against any and every business that requires its customers to be defenseless. Spread the word.
You’re right Paul. The free market works best when the customer is informed of the impacts of his decisions. I don’t patronize no-carry establishments. Ohio has a very strong pro-carry community, and remarkably few businesses have signs posted.
I wonder if the theater could be held liable for not protecting the safety of a permit holder who did disarm himself, per their request?
I would say no, same argument as before. It’s private property, the owner can set the rules. If you disapprove, don’t go there. If you do go there, in compliance with the rules, you agreed to them. Therefore it was your decision to be defenseless, and you can’t claim negligence against the owner for asking you to do something that you voluntarily agreed to do.
Negligence applies when a property owner exposes you to danger that you did not and could not know about. For example, if the property had been posted “this property protected by armed and bonded security guards” and in fact no such guards existed.
It is time for an all out boycott against any and every business that requires its customers to be defenseless. Spread the word.
Does this apply to gun shows and gun stores as well? All the ones in my city require all weapons to be unloaded before entering.
All of the gun shows I have been to had uniformed on-duty police present; I do not see how this left the patrons unprotected. And all gun shops I have visited had armed employees, with frequent law-enforcement visitors. Not at all parallel situations.
Just an FYI…police carry guns to protect themselves.
That or — in some cases — to force compliance.
Excellent .
Your excellent photo raises a question I’ve been considering since reading something else.
Let’s say my kid is a bit older, 4-6 for instance. The first instinct would be to pick her up. Now, if I’m getting out of Dodge, that’s appropriate. What if, OTOH, I’m engaging the shooter? Might it be better to move away from my dependents?
1. Hopefully that will draw the killer’s fire away from them.
2. I’ll have both hands and more of my attention free.
Myself and many of my fellow officers have discussed what an off duty officer patronizing this theatre should have done in this situation. If engaging… “mag dump” into the head. Followed by a secondary mag dump, followed by a third. If it doesn’t work at disabling him, it may serve as a distraction long enough to get close and put a knife between the armor. I personally no longer will carry a revolver as a primary, even though I love them, and will always have backup mags.
Most gun bans seem to focus on the purpose being to protect law enforcement. Myself and scores of other officers proudly disagree. I worked a security detail at the NRA convention, which promoted open carry for all attending. I never felt safer in my life. knowing I’m surrounded by pistol packing “good guys” regardless of uniform gives me the best goosebumps. My two cents.
I’d take a bullet for my kids…I’d give one…or several…as well.
Same here, though I think becoming a martyr should be somewhere after plans A, B, and C.
& here’s what the “blue shirts” at “der Innere Sicherheit” have to say: (found at dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/active_shooter_pocket_card.pdf)
I’m so glad the gubmint is so helpful!!!
You stop you shooter you or I’ll throw my popcorn at you!!!!!
• Attempt to take the active shooter down as a last resort
HOW TO RESPOND
1. EVACUATE
• As a last resort and only when your life is in imminent danger
• Attempt to incapacitate the shooter
• Act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter
2. HIDE OUT
3. TAKE ACTION
CALL 911 WHEN IT IS SAFE TO DO SO
Hey, I am all for throwing items at the shooter — at 1200fps.
The “interesting” part is that DHS is giving the same run-away instructions to their LEOs.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/29/border-patrol-union-claims-homeland-security-safety-course-promotes/?intcmp=trending
Property owners have the right to choose to require their customers to disarm themselves, but they should then be made to live with the consequences of that choice. I argue that an owner making that choice voluntarily assumes the duty to make his invitees as safe as they would be were they armed.
I would love to see a suit by the family of a dead CHL holder who left his weapon in the car because of the signs prohibiting them. Sooner or later that will happen, and it will be an interesting suit.
I am a retired lieutenant (30 years with Asheville, NC) and about 3 years ago, my oldest son opened a coffee shop in West Asheville of which I am a silent minority partner. He briefly considered whether to prohibit concealed weapons and came to the conclusion that any citizen who can legally carry a firearm into the business would be allowed to do so. He told me that he knew the bad guys wouldn’t go to the trouble of getting a permit. Our shop is Waking Life Espresso and all people legally carrying firearms are very very welcome in our business. Maybe it was growing up with me – I always carry a firearm with me everywhere I go. I would hate to ever think of my family or some innocent bystander being hurt or killed when I could have stopped it if I had my firearm. Don’t know that I could live with myself after that.
Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » HANNA ROSIN: In the Aurora Theater the Men Protected the Women. What Does that Mean? Something unc…