We Need to Grow Up a Bit

[mr surveyor]

I think as "adults" that have the right to carry firearms, we (collectively) need to grow up and act and speak more like adults. We may need to think a little before we speak (or type) on some subjects. A recent thread brought out a worn out statement (paraphrased) along the lines of "I have my CHL to defend me and mine and I have no responsibility to protect the 'sheep'". It may just be me, and I may have just taken it the wrong way (or just flat tired of seeing the same statement regurgitated), but I find it to be offensive, disingenuos and at the very least, for the lack of a better word, ignorant (as in not well informed of details). Many of these so called "sheep", or "sheeple" as often used to be more derogatory, are unarmed simple because their employer may make it so. To assume that every retail clerk at a cash register falls into the so called "sheep" category is just flat out rediculous. And to assume that it's o.k. for them to take a bullet because "it's there job" is even more rediculous, in my opinion.

There's a whole laundry list of similarly silly statements all over the interweb of gun forums that seem to pop up every time a scenerio discussing the use, or potential use of a firearm comes up. Seeing the one above in context with the original post of the thread it was in just tipped my scale a bit.

rant off


surv

[Beiruty]

Very important point and very debatable issue. My stand is that I am not a superman nor a coward. Your mileage may vary.

[ZeeMan]

well, since I have not yet taken my CHL course, nor do I currently own a handgun due to financial issues I guess I can be a sheep too............. I know what the OP means about calling people "sheep" or "sheeple"....it rubs me wrong as well, some just do not have the means to afford licensing and such as that, I am a married father of two that is the only one working in my household and 250 for class/CHL is hard to come by.............

[nyj]

I missed all that, but I'm a clerk at a gas station part time while I go to college full time. I didn't know I was a "sheep"

I work at a family owned chain of stores. Not your typical (insert name) store. My employer's policy does not allow firearms to be carried by employees...whether or not I would break a policy vs losing my job for defending myself is another story.

[AJ80]

Some clerks are under 21 and not allowed under Texas law to carry a firearm for self protection.

[nyj]

Some clerks are under 21 and not allowed under Texas law to carry a firearm for self protection.

I started working for my company when I was 18. Just turned 21.

[seamusTX]

Many of these so called "sheep", or "sheeple" as often used to be more derogatory, are unarmed simple because their employer may make it so. To assume that every retail clerk at a cash register falls into the so called "sheep" category is just flat out rediculous. And to assume that it's o.k. for them to take a bullet because "it's there job" is even more rediculous, in my opinion.

This is the very definition of "Batman license."

Does each adult have the right to determine his or her own circumstances? Are they obligated to take a minimum-wage scut job? Are they obligated to obey the stupid rules of their employer, risking at most getting fired from a scut job?

It seems plenty of pizza delivery drivers do not obey their employers' rules.

Meanwhile, do you think you are going to get a medal for intervening in a crime? Do you think the 100 Club is going to take care of your family if you get killed?

Do you have dependents? If not, suit yourself.

If you have dependents, do you have so much life insurance that they will be financially secure in your permanent absence? Almost no one does.

BTW, a traditional funeral costs some five to ten thousand dollars these days. Criminal defense at trial costs somewhere upwards of $20,000 going to seven figures for an appeal. Long-term medical care for a permanent disability costs even more, and I wouldn't like to have to depend upon Medicaid in Texas in the next few years.

- Jim

[The Annoyed Man]

The word "sheepdog" doesn't bother me that much. It is good for at least some people in the society to watchful of what goes on. And I love the word "sheep" when used in the biblical context. But I really don't like the word "sheeple" because it is unnecessarily disrespectful and disparaging of people who have, for the most part, never done anything to the user of the term to deserve being slandered.

[mr surveyor]

seamus

I did not make this a reply to the other thread, and did not say a thing about what I woul, or would not do in the situation outlined in that thread. And, I did not intend to bring that issue to this discussion. I think I made it clear that my intention was to put a damper on the rhetoric... particularly, in this instance, the use of the term "sheep" applied to an unarmed clerk behind a cash register. I have no idea what the inference that income has a thing to do with one's status in this case, so I'll not address that. Are we to blanketly apply the label of "sheeple" to every employee of every business that requires them to be disarmed on the job? Maybe we could refer to the underaged kid behind the cash register at the convenience store as a "lamb"?

My point is that we should learn to express ourselves better without the use of blanket type code words.


surv

[longtooth]

I have been in the cave loading all day.
Other one got locked.

Lets keep this one on topic & as OP stated: In the adult state.

[Texas Dan Mosby]

Relax.

It's the "innernets".....



People have different opinions, and different methods of conveying those opinions. I wouldn't get worked up about it, and most issues can probably be addressed through a PM or a mod.

[seamusTX]

I do not use terms such as sheep, sheeple, sheep dogs, or wolves. I have stated my negative opinion about these terms many times. Human beings are not dumb animals and cannot be judged by the same standards.

However, I do not see why an adult, legally armed or not, should put himself into the middle of a criminal situation, given the weak legal protections available to a non-LEO.

The legislature could clarify this situation. They have not done so. Obviously they have had other priorities for the past few decades.

Look at the Texas Castle Doctrine bill of 2007. It applies only to a direct threat to the defender on his own property or in his own vehicle. It provides no defense for protection of a third party on property that the defender does not own.

- Jim

[Beiruty]

.....Look at the Texas Castle Doctrine bill of 2007. It applies only to a direct threat to the defender on his own property or in his own vehicle. It provides no defense for protection of a third party on property that the defender does not own.

- Jim

Have you read the CHL booklet? I guess your info is not correct. Deadly force is justifed in protection of a third party anywhere a CHLer can carry. Even it's legal to defend yor neighbor property when his away with his permission and consent.

[mr surveyor]

Like I said... I was NOT trying to revive the now locked thread, or issue stated in it.

I give up. Time for bed.


surv

[seamusTX]

Have you read the CHL booklet? I guess your info is not correct. Deadly force is justifed in protection of a third party anywhere a CHLer can carry. Even it's legal to defend yor neighbor property when his away with his permission and consent.

I am aware of the statutes on defense of the person or property of third parties, specifically Penal Code 9.33 and 43.

I also am aware of the glaring lack of case law in that area.

Good luck finding a grand jury that understands it.

Joe Horn was not a legal precedent; he was a successful lightning dodger.

Referring to the O.P., if you want to abolish terms like sheeple and sheepdogs, fine with me. However, the mentality that certain special people (not in the least resembling a superhero) are entrusted with the care of the innocent and defenseless will still be with us.

- Jim