TexasCHLforum.com

http://news.yahoo.com/knockout-game-att ... 27404.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Man said no, so the knock out game began.

Another reason to carry all the time.

Too bad we can't strip this roving gang of thugs of ever receiving assistance from Society. Public schools included.
We can't cut off their hands. Can't tattoo a big X on their foreheads and each cheek for easy recognition in public. Can't hang them or shoot them or drop them 50 miles in the ocean.
Can't do any of that sort of stuff but we will continue pumping out all the benefits of Society to them and their families.

Compassionate Societies are their own worst enemies in dealing with those creatures among us who have no compassion at all.

Wrong answer.

So now there's a new variation, one that should raise all kinds of alarms.

Such a question from a stranger in public should be taken as a threat and responded to as such.

rbwhatever1 wrote:Too bad we can't strip this roving gang of thugs of ever receiving assistance from Society. Public schools included.
We can't cut off their hands. Can't tattoo a big X on their foreheads and each cheek for easy recognition in public. Can't hang them or shoot them or drop them 50 miles in the ocean.
Can't do any of that sort of stuff but we will continue pumping out all the benefits of Society to them and their families.

Compassionate Societies are their own worst enemies in dealing with those creatures among us who have no compassion at all.

A compassionate society also allows it's citizens the right of self-defense, and armed citizens are often the only effective way to deal with the problem.

A compassionate society that does not afford the right to self-defense is anything but.

So, if one of these thugs punched an armed person in face, and begins to run off, I think it would be difficult to justify deadly force; given that the thug is running away and a shot would likely be in the back.

What's the right answer? Yes, I am? Or no, I'm not? Regardless of whether you are armed or not, if you're close enough to be punched in the face, you're not exercising good situational awareness.

Further proof that knockout game devotees are vicious and rational but not suicidal.

baldeagle wrote:What's the right answer? Yes, I am? Or no, I'm not? Regardless of whether you are armed or not, if you're close enough to be punched in the face, you're not exercising good situational awareness.

I would immediately back away while placing my hand on my weapon and command, "stop, back off." My next step would depend on their reaction.

If you're going to give an answer I think it best be a variant of: "That's for me to know and you to find out."

BTW, I read that response used in a self-defense story. A woman in Austin pumping gas at night. She was carrying and she was situationally aware. When one of the two guys that had approached and weren't pumping gas tried to interview her she had positioned herself with her car between them. Her behavior got him thinking she might be armed, and when he asked her if she had a gun or something, she said "that's for me to know and you to find out." They got into their car and left.

Jim Beaux wrote:

baldeagle wrote:What's the right answer? Yes, I am? Or no, I'm not? Regardless of whether you are armed or not, if you're close enough to be punched in the face, you're not exercising good situational awareness.

I would immediately back away while placing my hand on my weapon and command, "stop, back off." My next step would depend on their reaction.

I would perceive this as a threat. It's not like he asked for the time or if I had a cigarette. Regardless of the question, I'm making space when any stranger walks up.

philip964 wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/knockout-game-att ... 27404.html

Man said no, so the knock out game began.

Another reason to carry all the time.

I don't know what carrying has to do with it. Admitting to being armed is a bad idea, carrying or not. I like VM's answer.

No, I carry two.