Winston Churchill once said “If you’re going through hell, keep going.” Words to the wise, as I once again suggest that an armed citizen should not engage criminals who are in the act of thievery. I took some major commentator-shaped flack for asserting that Texas home-owner Jason Lenox should not have detained an aspiring burglar at the point of a shotgun. Including some rather pointed remarks from Mr. Lenox and the neighbor in question. But I’m sticking to my guns: discretion is the better part of survival. For example, this Galco holster ad . . .
It’s perfectly clear that the car thieves are not aware of the presumed auto owner’s presence. The gun owner’s life is not in danger, never mind imminent danger. Drawing his weapon could even be seen as an act of provocation. The best bet: leave and call the cops. Done. What’s so important about this car (a Ford methinks) or what’s in it that’s makes it worth risking life and limb?
It should also be noted that there are two thieves. That’s twice as many chances to lose your life in defense of your beloved whip. And the deal’s going down in the proverbial empty parking garage, with the thieves’ back to the wall. These Hollywood-friendly circumstances vastly increase the odds that the bad guys will make a stand or counterattack.
I like Galco holsters. I like concealed carry. But I don’t like the idea that a gun in an [incredibly comfortable inside the waist band] holster makes it possible to stupid things. But it does, doesn’t it?
Robert, I see your point, as you’ve made so abundantly clear. You make perfect sense and I commend you for your survival instinct… very safe. You would, quite possibly, make a fine lawyer due to your logical thought process. That being said, I thank God you weren’t my Ranger-buddy with me in my time of need. It takes an extraordinary men to do extraordinary things in extraordinary situations and if you’re thinking “safely”, “smart” or even “logically”, you definitely aren’t/won’t be one of those men. Extraordinary situations aside, all effects stem only from one cause: our thinking. Safe=logic=safe, I know, but thinking of legal liability, survivability and danger can be too much in the forefront of our mind and get in the way of being who we should be: men. Yes, there are inherent costs in being such men, but I wholly believe it’s worth it, 100% and then some. God made us all different, that much is clear. We also change with age. I don’t mean to personally belittle you or question your personal manhood, but to drive home a point that’s driven home all too little today. There are many reasons we men are able to do “stupid things”, as you refer to them. If it weren’t for “stupid things” being done by other men, I personally would NOT be alive today. Taken to the extreme, “safe thinking” and survival instinct is synonymous with cowardice. This isn’t written in your state law or advised by your lawyer or taught by the women in our lives, as it’s a hallmark of men. It’s what we do. You can call it testosterone or whatever you like. It’s why we’re able to do “stupid things” over simply saving our own hides. Just be careful with that “safe” thinking, as it can be taken to extremes, just as “stupid things” can be seen as stupid and needless heroics. That being said, given the thinking in your article, your chances of living longer than me might be very good. I can live with that. It’s who I am. RLTW, Ivan C. -Wpns, A2/75th RGR.
Comments are closed.