Replies

RE Familyop Post 15:
As I said...society will always have its share; its the nature of giant groups of people living in close proximty. Not one of us can control THAT scenario, and for the idiot who assumes to put himself in THAT situation and take on the proper role of the cops, well, he deserves to be a Darwin Award candidate.

And I don’t think that the situation you outlined is the spirit of the original discussion article - if a citizen shows up at the scene of a crime-in-progress with the intent of interfering, I believe that is already a crime - this article is more concerned with an on-the-spot situation in which an armed citizen inadvertantly and unavoidably finds him/herself in the middle of a life-or-death situation, confronted by an active shooter.

But I’ll never hand over my right to some arbitrary power; I play by the state-by-state carry system’s rules right now because for the most part the system isn’t life-threatening; but if the system ever becomes life threatening, well, all bets are off, and I’ll do whatever is necessary for my Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” - period.

We’ll agree to disagree.

Carry quietly, discreetly, and always, and stay alive.

"And I don’t think that the situation you outlined is the spirit of the original discussion article...this article is more concerned with an on-the-spot situation in which an armed citizen inadvertantly and unavoidably finds him/herself in the middle of a life-or-death situation, confronted by an active shooter."

The title of the piece is "Armed citizens as first responders." It's common knowledge that first responders are almost never at the scene, although they do tend to arrive in a hurry. Let's have a look at a few of the analogies in the article.

* "In the field of medicine, the Golden Hour refers to the period of time immediately following a traumatic injury..."

* "It is often the first responders, preferably paramedics, who have the greatest impact on a victim's survival."

* "Before we get into that, though, let's take a brief look at the history of the individuals most people associate with the term "first responder," and that is paramedics."

* "...hopefully we can look forward to a time when CHL holders are seen as an essential piece of the puzzle for ensuring public safety during those crucial initial minutes following a violent criminal attack."

Yes. Maybe there will be ten of them or so listening to their scanners only a few blocks away. More manpower is better, especially when it's charged with plenty of adrenaline and for most men, nearly no training for combat situations. ...right? Do you know about the many people who already listen to their scanners and race to the scenes of crimes in hopes of viewing spectacles?

Yes. In the middle of his article, the author described scenarios where concealed carry permit holders might be present, but the "spirit" of the piece is in the colorful analogies that are written to get our attention the most.

Freepers, thank you for reading my article.

By “first responder” I did indeed mean what NFHale said,”an armed citizen inadvertantly and unavoidably finds him/herself in the middle of a life-or-death situation, confronted by an active shooter.”

It was my intent to broaden the term “first responder” to go beyond what are traditionally thought of as the first responders (police, fire, ems) and extend it to include armed citizens, who are also trained and able to respond to an emergency situation, albeit a different kind.