I came across this vid of a guy getting bike jacked in Brazil......don't worry karma caught up to the gunman in a timely manor  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaU_g8jsNcg

I finally got to watch it - at home.

That was not odd, that is what should happen in a perfect world every time somebody pulls a gun on you - you have a friendly COP right then and there challenging the hoodlum.

That was not odd, that was FAIR.

Divine Justice, express lane.  

A M E N

Quote:


In a perfect world you would pull out your OWN gun and take care of the situation yourself right then and there. Relying on a cop being nearby is like hoping to finance your next motorcycle by winning the lottery.

Of course most places prefer their citizens be unarmed and helpless, so most folks don't live in a perfect world.

mpescatori wrote on 10/16/13 at 00:10:18:


Defending oneself from a criminal, and being your own lawman are two entirely different things. The police have no legal obligation to act as the personal bodyguards for any particular individual, even if they happen to be on the scene. That's not just my opinion either. It's been decided in our courts.

In almost all cases the police show up after the crime has been commited, clean up the mess and conduct an investigation. They also act as a deterrent if they happen to be in the vicinity. Most criminals take pains not to commit a crime in front of a cop. Sometimes they make a mistake like they guy in the video.

Your own safety and the safety of the people you care about is ultimately YOUR responsibility, not the responsibility of a civil servant - even an armed civil servant.

If you are comfortable relying on the police to be your protectors in the event, however unlikely, that you encounter someone who has the means and will to injure or possibly kill you, then I certainly won't argue. I have a different, and I think more prudent, point of view, and it has nothing to do with having a "chip on my shoulder". It's just a refelection on the plain fact that by the time the police show up, the crime has already been commited, and the victim is already robbed, injured or in the worst ,case dead.

oldNslow wrote on 10/16/13 at 05:56:25:


Grammatical misunderstanding.

In the English language "you" is both the singular 2nd person and the plural 2nd person. I was using the latter.

I sincerely do not believe you, as a singular 2nd person, ever fought against people dwelling in teepees, however oldNslow you may claim to be.

As for the rest of this ethical and philosophical discussion, you and I cannot use our own domestic laws and precedents to comment what is fair in a 3rd Country.
What happens in... Brazil? wherever... is NOT the resposnibility of a US Court, much less of a US Constable.

That is why I commented "in a perfect world"...
...because the first thing that happens when you are in distress is to cry for "HELP!" and you wish the best help there is would come at once.

I hope I have made my point this time.

oldNslow wrote on 10/16/13 at 08:58:34:

To point out the obvious, in this case, you'd have to admit that he had brought a tongue to a gun fight.  And that is best held till the gun is no longer pointed at it.  Even if you had a gun with you, best not disclose that fact until his attention is elsewhere.

Serowbot wrote on 10/16/13 at 11:20:23:

merely making the belabored point that you don't spit into the wind... wait till it's pointed another way.  Someone stooped over to pick up your bike is very vulnerable, and can be convinced to drop his gun if you have yours planted in his ear.

And about the point that we cannot be our own lawman... it is legal for a citizen to arrest someone.  You had just better be sure about it or you can be yourself arrested for unlawful detainer.

I'm with you oldNslow, I feel that I have the right to protect my life.  If someone blatantly puts someone else's life in danger by pointing a loaded firearm at them to commit a crime, they opened the door for themselves to be killed.