frankie_the_yankee wrote:Oh it's more than a nagging feeling to me. I'd consider it pretty much the lay of the land in much of the country, including the so-called (self-annointed) "elites".stevie_d_64 wrote: "If he (owner) had just left the (alleged assailant) alone, and just call the cops, no one would have gotten killed."
For years I have had this nagging little feeling that there is this general consensus in the general non-carrying public, and maybe within the very slim fringes within our own community that if you "verbally" instruct someone to stop doing something forceful, or potentially injurous or deadly to someone else, you are escalating the situation...Therefore you are creating a situation that forces you to react possibly with the use of deadly force (extreme)...
It is just something that bugs me a little bit about this, and a few other incidents over the years...
I could rant for page after droning page on this, but the short treatment is that the "non-confrontational" philosophy is in essence an elaborate effort for people to rationalize their own cowardice.
Ironically enough, the purveyors of avoiding confronation, of choosing a strategy of abject surrender ("give them what they want and they won't hurt you"), and of "letting the police do their jobs" (when they do not really know what those jobs actually are), tend to be the same people who make a big deal of the importance of having high "self esteem".
So how much self esteem is exhibited by immediately surrendering to the demands of a criminal attacker?
I think that most of us on this forum actually do have high self esteem. We hold ourselves in such high regard that we are not willing to "outsource" the protection of our very lives, and the lives of those important to us, to "hired help".
Read "A Nation of Cowards" by Jeffrey Snyder for a full treatment of this idea.
I good reminder for the new members who weren't around when Frankie was with us.