CDZ When Do We Start to FIGHT BACK!?!?!

[Gracie]

"We"? So you are signing up? Which branch of the military are you joining?

Who's talking about the military? I'm talking about 3 or 4 of the +/- 20 people in that conference room the other day ATTACKING the shooters rather than standing there to be butchered like sheep. FIGHTING BACK rather than simply being victims.

I'm talking about private citizens defending themselves and those around them.

Save yer breath. Pussies are what we have become.

 

[bodecea]

"We"? So you are signing up? Which branch of the military are you joining?

Who's talking about the military? I'm talking about 3 or 4 of the +/- 20 people in that conference room the other day ATTACKING the shooters rather than standing there to be butchered like sheep. FIGHTING BACK rather than simply being victims.

I'm talking about private citizens defending themselves and those around them.

Ah...but you WERE talking about the military whether you meant to or not. I was with some friends last nite (we are all vets) and one thing vets have in common is that we run towards danger, not away. So....I ask again...what branch are you joining?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Than that needs to be changed.
Or at least give the Americans who want that option to be free to carry without infringement.

What needs to be changed? 46 states allow for open carry. Most states allow for concealed carry. I'd like to see both those numbers be 50, but that's a pipe dream. Having the gun doesn't always make it the best option in a particular situation.

Not if you're a law abiding citizen and dont carry in a gun free zone.
The record on mass shootings speaks for itself.

 

[MikeK]

As one poster has already pointed out, We defend ourselves through police and military under the direction of democratically elected state and federal government. The idea of a posse comitatus boarding every US flight is new to my ears. Would alcohol continue to be served in flight? Would the posse be issued the special weapons necessary to avoid piercing the pressurized cabin? Who will pay the claims of relatives of the innocent passengers killed in the cross-fire? These are some minor details to be worked out before your idea becomes law. Keep thinking about it, though, it's what you're good at.

Defending ourselves "through police and military" obviously poses certain limitations. If these internally-based terrorist activities continue, which there is every reason to believe they will, at some point we must rely on ourselves to defend ourselves.

As far as acts of in-flight terrorism are concerned, the means of defending against them are limited for obvious physical reasons. But no such limitations exist to prevent ordinary adult citizens from thinking about defending themselves against armed terrorists in their midst.

 

[Fishlore]

As one poster has already pointed out, We defend ourselves through police and military under the direction of democratically elected state and federal government. The idea of a posse comitatus boarding every US flight is new to my ears. Would alcohol continue to be served in flight? Would the posse be issued the special weapons necessary to avoid piercing the pressurized cabin? Who will pay the claims of relatives of the innocent passengers killed in the cross-fire? These are some minor details to be worked out before your idea becomes law. Keep thinking about it, though, it's what you're good at.

Defending ourselves "through police and military" obviously poses certain limitations. If these internally-based terrorist activities continue, which there is every reason to believe they will, at some point we must rely on ourselves to defend ourselves.

As far as acts of in-flight terrorism are concerned, the means of defending against them are limited for obvious physical reasons. But no such limitations exist to prevent ordinary adult citizens from thinking about defending themselves against armed terrorists in their midst.

I wouldn't go so far as to claim that there is never a time when an armed citizen is of no use in a terrorist attack, but I wonder what scenarios you think would work well and what would be the downside of civilian response in scenarios where such response would be tactically inadvisable.

The idea of an armed criminal slaughtering innocent victims is abhorrent and the deterrent value of the armed citizen defender seems self-evident. But there are questions that are difficult to answer. What about a false alarm, a kid with a cap gun draws fire which sets off a chain reaction as successive citizens mis-identify each other as terrorists? How would that one play out in a sports arena or a busy shopping mall?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Takes bravery to do that. Attack a shooter with a gun that is.

Yes ut dies. Bravery and a lot of balls. Two thing American Men used to be known for. Not so much anymore.

Please. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[daws101]

I think people are not addressing the OP's main point, which is why people choose to run from a shooter instead of mobbing him. That doesn't require a gun.[/QUOTE ]



Hold up now...are you insinuating we should just rush em rather than shoot em?
I mean yeah..I guess if you had no choice it's better than dying on your knees but i'd personally rather have a firearm.

what happens when you miss?

 

[eagle1462010]

When I read the Op........I thought.............yep I agree...............Yes we should fight back and that we should take the gloves off and stop the ROE's and PC BS................Yet this went straight to Americans are cowards because in that split second that it happens they didn't rush into the line of fire going out in a blaze of glory.....................

The shooter has the element of surprise..............the people got caught cold................and to say they were cowards for not rushing rapid fire as a group in that split second is Stupid.............

I imagine some did that very thing in California but were gunned down...........................It is a mute point.

 

[Asclepias]

When I read the Op........I thought.............yep I agree...............Yes we should fight back and that we should take the gloves off and stop the ROE's and PC BS................Yet this went straight to Americans are cowards because in that split second that it happens they didn't rush into the line of fire going out in a blaze of glory.....................

The shooter has the element of surprise..............the people got caught cold................and to say they were cowards for not rushing rapid fire as a group in that split second is Stupid.............

I imagine some did that very thing in California but were gunned down...........................It is a mute point.

Thats actually what coward means. You avoid danger.

 

[Weatherman2020]

On September 11th, 2001 America was attacked. Thousands died in NYC and at the Pentagon. But one planeload of passengers got word of what was happening and FOUGHT BACK. United flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, PA and the heroes of that flight created a mentality that ebded up stopping at least two other plane-borne attacks (Richard Reed's shoe bombing attempt and the underwear bomber incident).

Over time the resolve of airline passengers, and Americans as a whole has waned. Now, we crawl under desks or fall to the ground and pray thst the active shooter in the building doesn't find us. We hope the police get there in time to save us. We expect others to protect us.

When the hell are we as a society going to realize that WE are the ones who have the responsibility to defend OURSELVES? When will we start to fight back against these terrorists, active shooters and lunatics rather than cower at their feet while peeing our pants hoping they shoot the man or woman next to us rather than us?

Obama said he's not interested in winning. Not enough time between rounds of golf he says.

 

[Weatherman2020]

On September 11th, 2001 America was attacked. Thousands died in NYC and at the Pentagon. But one planeload of passengers got word of what was happening and FOUGHT BACK. United flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, PA and the heroes of that flight created a mentality that ebded up stopping at least two other plane-borne attacks (Richard Reed's shoe bombing attempt and the underwear bomber incident).

Over time the resolve of airline passengers, and Americans as a whole has waned. Now, we crawl under desks or fall to the ground and pray thst the active shooter in the building doesn't find us. We hope the police get there in time to save us. We expect others to protect us.

When the hell are we as a society going to realize that WE are the ones who have the responsibility to defend OURSELVES? When will we start to fight back against these terrorists, active shooters and lunatics rather than cower at their feet while peeing our pants hoping they shoot the man or woman next to us rather than us?

Good point. The VA Tech shooting all the students just sat at their desks getting picked off. I've undergone active shooter training a number of times, and it's the same message - if you can't flee you go on the offense.

 

[eagle1462010]

On September 11th, 2001 America was attacked. Thousands died in NYC and at the Pentagon. But one planeload of passengers got word of what was happening and FOUGHT BACK. United flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, PA and the heroes of that flight created a mentality that ebded up stopping at least two other plane-borne attacks (Richard Reed's shoe bombing attempt and the underwear bomber incident).

Over time the resolve of airline passengers, and Americans as a whole has waned. Now, we crawl under desks or fall to the ground and pray thst the active shooter in the building doesn't find us. We hope the police get there in time to save us. We expect others to protect us.

When the hell are we as a society going to realize that WE are the ones who have the responsibility to defend OURSELVES? When will we start to fight back against these terrorists, active shooters and lunatics rather than cower at their feet while peeing our pants hoping they shoot the man or woman next to us rather than us?

Good point. The VA Tech shooting all the students just sat at their desks getting picked off. I've undergone active shooter training a number of times, and it's the same message - if you can't flee you go on the offense.

I agree with that................

 

[Moonglow]

On September 11th, 2001 America was attacked. Thousands died in NYC and at the Pentagon. But one planeload of passengers got word of what was happening and FOUGHT BACK. United flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, PA and the heroes of that flight created a mentality that ebded up stopping at least two other plane-borne attacks (Richard Reed's shoe bombing attempt and the underwear bomber incident).

Over time the resolve of airline passengers, and Americans as a whole has waned. Now, we crawl under desks or fall to the ground and pray thst the active shooter in the building doesn't find us. We hope the police get there in time to save us. We expect others to protect us.

When the hell are we as a society going to realize that WE are the ones who have the responsibility to defend OURSELVES? When will we start to fight back against these terrorists, active shooters and lunatics rather than cower at their feet while peeing our pants hoping they shoot the man or woman next to us rather than us?

I have throwing starts to fight back..........

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Folks, this is the Clean Debate Zone. Any further insults will result in infractions.

 

[eagle1462010]

Folks, this is the Clean Debate Zone. Any further insults will result in infractions.

Could you move it to the Flame Zone Pretty please..................

 

[MikeK]

[...]

The idea of an armed criminal slaughtering innocent victims is abhorrent and the deterrent value of the armed citizen defender seems self-evident. But there are questions that are difficult to answer. What about a false alarm, a kid with a cap gun draws fire which sets off a chain reaction as successive citizens mis-identify each other as terrorists? How would that one play out in a sports arena or a busy shopping mall?

The effect of increasingly repressive gun laws in most parts of the U.S. over the past few decades has been seriously diminished capability of the average citizen to be defensively useful in the kind of internal terrorist situation we are faced with today. At a time when the presence of armed citizens is becoming necessary we continue to hear from the anti-gun faction demanding even more restrictions.

What is needed now is a federally subsidized and organized effort to train qualified citizens in effective handling and use of firearms and methods of proper deployment under stressful circumstances. What I hear from most law-enforcement officials when the subject of armed citizens arises is how incompetent they would be in an armed confrontation -- and for the most part these officials are right. But the only reason they are right is because there presently are no training requirements for gun owners.

Before one can be licensed to put a car on a public road one must demonstrate competence behind the wheel. But one can buy a gun and take it home without ever having pressed a trigger and knowing absolutely nothing about handling and deploying a gun except for what's been seen in movies and on tv. Simply stated, there presently is a very real need for an effective training program for civilians who wish to own and carry firearms.

ISIS has declared war on us but this war is not taking place on some foreign shore and affecting our armed forces. It began on 9/11 and is taking place in our neighborhoods. As we have seen in the U.K., France and now in the U.S., ordinary citizens are the terrorists' primary targets and law-enforcement is not capable of protecting us from them. So steps must be taken to train citizens who wish to be armed in the proper way to defend themselves with guns.

This is something that needs to be learned and practiced in order to be effective. So instead of seeking to impose more restrictive gun laws, thus making citizens less capable of defending themselves against terrorists, government needs to shift its focus to increasing civilian competence with firearms.

That is the most appropriate and effective response to the emerging terrorist threat .

 

[Fishlore]

[...]

The idea of an armed criminal slaughtering innocent victims is abhorrent and the deterrent value of the armed citizen defender seems self-evident. But there are questions that are difficult to answer. What about a false alarm, a kid with a cap gun draws fire which sets off a chain reaction as successive citizens mis-identify each other as terrorists? How would that one play out in a sports arena or a busy shopping mall?

The effect of increasingly repressive gun laws in most parts of the U.S. over the past few decades has been seriously diminished capability of the average citizen to be defensively useful in the kind of internal terrorist situation we are faced with today. At a time when the presence of armed citizens is becoming necessary we continue to hear from the anti-gun faction demanding even more restrictions.

What is needed now is a federally subsidized and organized effort to train qualified citizens in effective handling and use of firearms and methods of proper deployment under stressful circumstances. What I hear from most law-enforcement officials when the subject of armed citizens arises is how incompetent they would be in an armed confrontation -- and for the most part these officials are right. But the only reason they are right is because there presently are no training requirements for gun owners.

Before one can be licensed to put a car on a public road one must demonstrate competence behind the wheel. But one can buy a gun and take it home without ever having pressed a trigger and knowing absolutely nothing about handling and deploying a gun except for what's been seen in movies and on tv. Simply stated, there presently is a very real need for an effective training program for civilians who wish to own and carry firearms.

ISIS has declared war on us but this war is not taking place on some foreign shore and affecting our armed forces. It began on 9/11 and is taking place in our neighborhoods. As we have seen in the U.K., France and now in the U.S., ordinary citizens are the terrorists' primary targets and law-enforcement is not capable of protecting us from them. So steps must be taken to train citizens who wish to be armed in the proper way to defend themselves with guns.

This is something that needs to be learned and practiced in order to be effective. So instead of seeking to impose more restrictive gun laws, thus making citizens less capable of defending themselves against terrorists, government needs to shift its focus to increasing civilian competence with firearms.

That is the most appropriate and effective response to the emerging terrorist threat .

In my youth I joined a US government subsidized national organization dedicated to increasing the number of skilled riflemen among Americans. No, I do not mean the USMC, that came almost ten years later. I am referring to the NRA, at that time an organization dedicated to gun safety and gun control as well as to supporting thousands of .22 cal target clubs for the boys and girls of America. I joined in the fifth grade. Our instructor was a teacher in our school who had been a Marine in WWII. He was a terrific guy whose range procedures came straight out of his military training. We though it was truly cool and I stayed in the program all the way up the stairway of ranks and medals right to the top.

Alas, the NRA in the past generation has become what we all see today -- a lobby for manufacturers interested in gun profits not gun safety. Until some sanity returns to the issue and use of firearms, I am skeptical of any government program to increase gun use, no matter how well-intentioned.

 

[320 Years of History]

On September 11th, 2001 America was attacked. Thousands died in NYC and at the Pentagon. But one planeload of passengers got word of what was happening and FOUGHT BACK. United flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, PA and the heroes of that flight created a mentality that ebded up stopping at least two other plane-borne attacks (Richard Reed's shoe bombing attempt and the underwear bomber incident).

Over time the resolve of airline passengers, and Americans as a whole has waned. Now, we crawl under desks or fall to the ground and pray thst the active shooter in the building doesn't find us. We hope the police get there in time to save us. We expect others to protect us.

When the hell are we as a society going to realize that WE are the ones who have the responsibility to defend OURSELVES? When will we start to fight back against these terrorists, active shooters and lunatics rather than cower at their feet while peeing our pants hoping they shoot the man or woman next to us rather than us?

To the specific question of "when," I can't give you an answer. I don't think anyone can no matter their perceived prognostication abilities.

Your post seems to have two tones: one defensive and one offensive. I suppose that's not surprising seeing as the character of the groups you identify differ vastly and what constitutes "fighting back" will thus differ among them.

There are a variety of specific tactics that may hold promise for achieving the tacit outcome of abating attacks of the sort you described. Those tactics, however, work best when there's a (or some) foundational strategy that they support.

With regard to attacks perpetrated by folks inculcated in the same set of ideals we have in the U.S., I believe an ounce or two of prevention is worth a ton of cure. The specific strategy is to create our citizens as leaders rather than as followers. That's no small task, and not one people like to take on, because it involves dealing with human nature head on. It requires developing people and their minds rather than developing tangible objects, and quite frankly, we are far better at managing things, making things than we are with people skills. It requires creating a society of big-picture thinkers, strategists not tacticians, although the road to becoming a strategic thinker necessitates one's first being a tactician.

The reason the strategy I mention will work is because leaders, good ones, don't haul off and start shooting people; they analyze the problem, gather their resources and carefully effect change. Also, they don't harbor hubris over much beyond their own ability to change things given the rules of the game. Most importantly, they recognize when the problem is within them and not external to themselves. Leaders know that Jesus' teaching "treat others as you'd have them treat you" -- a teaching that nothing to do with religion and everything to do with how to manage interpersonal relationships -- is the most important code by which they must live, and in all their actions they keep it foremost in mind. In short, leaders don't succumb to the despondency that places harming others as the sole means of achieving their ends.

The reason the strategy I suggest may not work isn't inherent to the strategy. It's because implementing it isn't easy or quick. It takes a lot of integrity, integrity, and patience to become a successful leader. Most folks want instant gratification, they want a "magic bullet," the tactic that will work now and quickly, and, truly, for problems that issue from people's emotional shortcomings, there is no such thing. Rome wasn't built in a day, neither was it destroyed in one.

The problems we face, to frame them in medical parlance, are chronic not acute. We see and treat with most situations as a crisis that must be dealt with in exclusion, or on an event by event basis. Well, one can apply that approach, but doing so is just a tactic without a strategy. It will never get at what is the root cause of the problem, so the underlying cause will never go away.

When it comes to the parties who lack our cultural sensibilities, it's a different matter, and frankly a simpler one. It's one that can be resolved via one simple tactic, namely the one I mentioned earlier that Jesus gave us long ago. I bid you, try if you can to get beyond the acts and consider how as a people we, America, have treated the Islamic world over the past century. Try to put yourself in their shoes. Study history and then ask yourself how you might feel were you treated that way. Then ask yourself what you'd want as recompense. I'll bet that killing thousands isn't it. Well, it's no different with them. The solution is a simple tactic: collaboration not combat, it's taking a "we" approach, not a "us and them" one. Of course, one can only take than approach and see its merits once one has learned how to be a leader.

 

[MikeK]

In my youth I joined a US government subsidized national organization dedicated to increasing the number of skilled riflemen among Americans. No, I do not mean the USMC, that came almost ten years later. I am referring to the NRA, at that time an organization dedicated to gun safety and gun control as well as to supporting thousands of .22 cal target clubs for the boys and girls of America. I joined in the fifth grade. Our instructor was a teacher in our school who had been a Marine in WWII. He was a terrific guy whose range procedures came straight out of his military training. We though it was truly cool and I stayed in the program all the way up the stairway of ranks and medals right to the top.

Alas, the NRA in the past generation has become what we all see today -- a lobby for manufacturers interested in gun profits not gun safety. Until some sanity returns to the issue and use of firearms, I am skeptical of any government program to increase gun use, no matter how well-intentioned.

I remember that program and I did attend two of those training sessions which were conducted in the basement gym of P.S. 10 in Brooklyn, NY. I didn't attend more because my father (who fought through the Pacific and was wounded on Guadalcanal) regularly took us to a quarry in upstate New York where we'd shoot hundreds of rounds of .22, then up to 30.06 as we got older.

I was in the Corps, too. 1956 to '60. Japan, Okinawa and LeJeune.

It seems rather obvious that one effect of WW-II was understanding the importance of weapons and knowing how to use them. Unfortunately this awareness diminished over the years -- probably because the effect of prolonged peace, our position of supreme power in the world and emerging reliance on nuclear weaponry reduced Government's concern with civilian participation in defense of the Homeland. The concept of fanatical internal Islamic terrorism never occurred to them.

As time went on an increasing segment of the population became pre-consciously dependent on the military and their local police agencies to protect them and the notion of needing to defend themselves gradually dissolved into what we are seeing today in the obsessive anti-gun movement.

 

[Fishlore]

In my youth I joined a US government subsidized national organization dedicated to increasing the number of skilled riflemen among Americans. No, I do not mean the USMC, that came almost ten years later. I am referring to the NRA, at that time an organization dedicated to gun safety and gun control as well as to supporting thousands of .22 cal target clubs for the boys and girls of America. I joined in the fifth grade. Our instructor was a teacher in our school who had been a Marine in WWII. He was a terrific guy whose range procedures came straight out of his military training. We though it was truly cool and I stayed in the program all the way up the stairway of ranks and medals right to the top.

Alas, the NRA in the past generation has become what we all see today -- a lobby for manufacturers interested in gun profits not gun safety. Until some sanity returns to the issue and use of firearms, I am skeptical of any government program to increase gun use, no matter how well-intentioned.

I remember that program and I did attend two of those training sessions which were conducted in the basement gym of P.S. 10 in Brooklyn, NY. I didn't attend more because my father (who fought through the Pacific and was wounded on Guadalcanal) regularly took us to a quarry in upstate New York where we'd shoot hundreds of rounds of .22, then up to 30.06 as we got older.

I was in the Corps, too. 1956 to '60. Japan, Okinawa and LeJeune.

It seems rather obvious that one effect of WW-II was understanding the importance of weapons and knowing how to use them. Unfortunately this awareness diminished over the years -- probably because the effect of prolonged peace, our position of supreme power in the world and emerging reliance on nuclear weaponry reduced Government's concern with civilian participation in defense of the Homeland. The concept of fanatical internal Islamic terrorism never occurred to them.

As time went on an increasing segment of the population became pre-consciously dependent on the military and their local police agencies to protect them and the notion of needing to defend themselves gradually dissolved into what we are seeing today in the obsessive anti-gun movement.

I live "north of the notches" in New Hampshire, rolling wooded country where the nearest city is in Canada. Hunting is big business here, deer season ends this Sunday gun issues don't come up very often. But most Americans don't live in this sort of community.

Gun violence seems to be a city problem, which makes it important because most people live in or around cities. If guns weren't so easy to transport, local laws would solve the problems without people who don't have the problems. But there's the problem. Guns are easy to carry around. I can't tell people in Chicago that they don't have a gun problem and I don't see a way to solve their problem without making it my problem.