Replies

Basically what we are discussing here is each individuals personal comfort/safety level. I've presented to several people (who heatedly claim they would jump into this situation) a scenario much more dangerous to their own well being than a couple of teenage chicks having a catfight in a Target store.

Not one has answered. We know why. Most people, particularly those here on FR, would be willing to interject themselves into a situation that appears unfair, as long as they had a pretty good feeling they themselves wouldn't be hurt...at least too badly. But everyone has a line they would think twice at crossing.

This is the point. That line is subjective and personal to each individual. Just because your line is a bit further up or down the danger scale doesn't make you a bigger hero or coward.

Some hear proudly claim their untested heroism by claiming they would jump into a teenage catfight. Wow, I'm impressed.

Bravery and heroism, in day to day life as in battle, is not determined by staying on the safe side of your comfort quotient, wherever you personally place it. It's when you take action believing there is considerable danger to yourself, possibly even death, that is the definition of heroism. And no one knows how they would really react until put into that situation.

So all this talk of what we would or wouldn't do is just a bunch of hot air. Come back when you have something real to talk about. Other than that, have a nice day.

"I've presented to several people (who heatedly claim they would jump into this situation) a scenario much more dangerous to their own well being than a couple of teenage chicks having a catfight in a Target store. ... Bravery and heroism"

They weren't teenage chicks. They were bangers and the oldest was 20. The 16y/o was about her threat level. They were leading the 14 and 10 y/o. It's very likely they would have injured anyone that intervened, including stabing, or cutting their throats.

You were right to advise taking notes, because most could not handle the situation w/o getting into significant risk during the fight itself, and other legal risk, especially in MA. Bravery and heroism might apply to anyone who attempted to stop this criminal act, even though they'd never challenge 4 big guys. Ignorance and incompetence might also apply in this case

Stepping in to challenge the 4 bangers you posed would be stupid for most to attempt, not bravery. Stepping in requires that one know what they're doing.

So all this talk of what we would or wouldn't do is just a bunch of hot air. Come back when you have something real to talk about. Other than that, have a nice day.

You have assumed a hell of a lot, Bob. Assumptions are dangerous, especially for someone who would have people believe their words and logic on the web-radio.

Come back when you have facts regarding the real-life situations of your audience before you bloviate, FRiend.

Have a nice day.

"And no one knows how they would really react until put into that situation."

You are absolutely correct about that, but you miss the point that in THIS instance it was just a bunch of teenage girls. One may not have had to even touch them. Just a large man charging them yelling might be enough to get them to scatter. Most bullies are cowards and would retreat if it happened.

If someone lived in the neighborhood and feared a reprisal from male relatives, friends, etc., I wouldn't condemn them for not responding physically, but it seems to me that society in general, esp. in Blue States NEVER wants to intervene. It's always someone else's job. The police, the gov't, etc. Here, bystanders probably outnumbered the assailants by a large margian and no one did a thing.

I'm not lamenting individuals' actions, because I know very well what it's like to be afraid, but society's abdication of self-defense and defense of the innocent.