I carry a handgun with me nearly everywhere I legally can (and maybe then some). I told myself when I started carrying that the gun is only for the protection of myself and any family or friends that are accompanying me. I have no responsibility to protect random strangers. And I have no illusions that other strangers have any obligation to protect me if the roles were reversed.
If you really value your own personal safety, it's your responsibility to carry a weapon and know how to use it to defend yourself. And if you can't or won't defend yourself, then that's when you should definitely give up the cellphone instead of risking your life for it.
If I was on the train, in the moment, I may have decided to intervene and shoot the knife-wielder. But more than likely, because I value my own life far more than those of strangers, I would first and foremost be looking for my own way to escape. I'd have my hand on my gun, but it'd only be coming out if there was a direct threat to my own life or any of my companions.
It's not so much the act or physical risk of injury that would stop me, though. I'm fairly confident in having the advantage of a gun over a knife. And it really wouldn't bother me to shoot some thug who's stabbing a guy. That calculus would change, of course, if I only also had a knife or was unarmed or if the thug also had a gun, but I'm just considering this specific situation. I'd be more likely to draw and intervene if I knew the law and public would be 100% on my side, but unfortunately that's not the society we live in.
First, since carrying a handgun without a license in DC is a crime, if I was carrying, I'd be opening myself up to Bernie Goetz-style criminal charges for just having the gun. Plus, I don't know if there would be any extra charges specifically for carrying on the metro. I have no idea how an overzealous prosecutor might react with me. I'm not risking jail time defending a stranger. Now if I was on a train in Texas, Florida, or any other state that recognizes one of my handgun licenses, the situation would be a lot different and I'd be much more likely to intervene. Right here showcases the irony of someone like Kevin Sutherland supporting stricter gun control policies.
Second, the media would probably not be on my side. I can see the headline now: "White Cop-Wannabe Guns Down Black Teenager", while the media circulates an unflattering photo of me and a baby picture of the knife-wielding thug. Then they'd bring out the thug's family with cries of "he dindu nuthin, he was a good boy getting his life back together." I have no desire to be under such media scrutiny.
Third, I am not a cop and thus don't have the legal protections afforded to the police. If a cop intervened and shot the knife-wielding thug, the state would protect him from any liability issues if the thug's family tried suing. But I have no such protections, and I would have to go out of pocket for my own legal defense in any criminal or civil proceedings.
For those reasons, I can't blame any of the passengers for not wanting to intervene, nor do I think of any of them as "beta". They're simply responding to the incentives and disincentives of the times we live in.
Quote: (07-09-2015 04:43 PM)Easy_C Wrote:
As for how I would handle it, let's just say that while certain lethal weapons are banned in those cities that equally lethal substitutes can be constructed in a manner of seconds from items that are perfectly innocuous to carry. I typically do carry those items on me when I'm in areas that ban guns like government buildings, airports, and bars.
Would you mind providing some examples or links to such improvised weapons? I'm quite curious about how to still be armed when I have to pass through security checkpoints.