Man it's amazing how fast a thread can turn to utter 8th grade crap after B2 enters it. Granted he isn't partaking in the name calling, his presence was the beginning and he seems to be fueling the rage inside Rich...Lead's insults aren't helping much either, but I guess you have to fight fire with fire?
There is a lot of assuming and speculating coming from both sides, by comparing extremes on either side, or comparing life and money. I am going to say there are millions that would defend another innocent in the face of death even if they did not have a firearm. So while you can have thousands that are too afraid to talk on an online chat board or draw their firearm to save another, I am happy in the fact there are millions of rambos in this world that are indeed saving people.
In the end it seems there are two major sides. The cowards and the rambos. Each one feels the other is wrong, each one feels sorry for whoever has to be near the opposite during a robbery. I don't see this changing, I don't care for being a coward, but I know I sure as hell wouldn't let one die.
I have a question for B2...that's if he even gets this message since I believe to be on his ignore list. If you feel there is no need to defend yourself or another during a robbery like the OP because 96% do not become robbery homicide...why do you not open carry when 96% aren't chosen as victims in the first place? From what I remember, you don't like to open carry, because that 4% chance (which is probably closer to .01% chance) of being disarmed or chosen because you are open carrying...yet you won't defend the life of another on the 4% chance they will die. I understand your point on the chances of becoming a fire fight go to 100% if you engage the criminal, but same goes for when you conceal your firearm and become the 99% of victims that were seemingly, and most likely, unarmed.
