The Retreat of Courage

[mVitus]

In terms of school shooting, I graduated high school 4 years ago so I might have some more recent first-hand experiences than others here.

1: Saying high school jocks are so big and strong to take down a shooter, yeah no. Bullets travel faster than Usain Bolt and even if your jocks could coordinate, they’re split up amongst many classes in different parts of the school.
2: Throwing backpacks would not be effective. You’d have one shot in a high-pressure situation and no experience aiming a thrown backpack. I can’t aim a baseball reliably and you’re saying that if an armed shooter had come into a classroom I’d magically hit them?
3: Very very few teens have any experience organizing a charge. Charging a shooter ain’t gonna happen.
4: I sometimes thought about what I’d do if a shooter came in. Taking inventory, I had a belt that would be longer range than arms, but I also knew that if I ever found myself in such a situation, I’d freeze.
5: You mentioned some high schoolers are 18, old enough for the army, but the army still has to train them.18 year olds aren’t magically military grunts.

And as a last note, code red procedures exist for a reason. School officials know they’re not gonna get a magic army popping up. And if it did, they know students going into the hals and attacking a shooter would get more people dead. Staying in a locked room with lights off and staying out of sight us done for a reason.

I also find it disgustingly distasteful to say the Parkland Students were at fault for not attacking the attacker. Akin to saying to a rape victim, “Shoulda fought harder.”

 

[ricmat]

I’m not accusing any particular person. I’m accusing society as a whole. In the past, people who had never had their courage tested often performed with courage when courage was needed. In large groups of people, there were always some “heros / heroines”. I don’t see that anymore. I’m just making an observation and asking a question. Of course I’m not perfect, neither are you. I admit that I might not have the courage that I admire in others so much.

But as long as you brought up the subject, we often have to tell people to do something, or not to do something even if we have no personal experience with that “something.” For example, I’m a male. Does this mean that I cannot tell a woman that abortion is a sin, since I’ve never had one myself?

 

[ricmat]

Except for the Nazi insignia, I think most large police departments already do have one!!!

 

[Cruciferi]

Loading…

en.m.wikipedia.org

That’s the Iron Cross symbol for the German Army. The Wiesel Armoured Weapons Carrier is currently the only true modern tankette in use in Western Europe.

 

[mVitus]

But as long as you brought up the subject, we often have to tell people to do something, or not to do something even if we have no personal experience with that “something.” For example, I’m a male. Does this mean that I cannot tell a woman that abortion is a sin, since I’ve never had one myself?

There’s a difference between thus and the abortion question. Abortion is a moral question with a clear cut answer from simple logic. Running at a gunman when you’re unarmed and untrained is not a moral requirement. Kind of like the difference between saying abortion is wrong and saying that giving your child up for adoption is wrong.

You seem to be saying people that don’t show your ideal brand of courage are in the wrong. And when you make the assumption that you’d do what you say you’d do if the situation came up is up for question honestly. Not because of any moral failing on your part, but because a decent portion of people don’t have what it would take to run at a gunman unarmed,

 

[ricmat]

Sorry, I thought the Germans (Nazis) used it during WW2.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[ricmat]

You seem to be saying people that don’t show your ideal brand of courage are in the wrong. And when you make the assumption that you’d do what you say you’d do if the situation came up is up for question honestly. Not because of any moral failing on your part, but because a decent portion of people don’t have what it would take to run at a gunman unarmed,

I’m not saying that any person is in the wrong. I’m observing that there is less courage in circulation than there used to be.

I also said that I didn’t know exactly what I’d do if confronted with the situation myself. I admire courage. That doesn’t mean I’m brimming over with it. I wish I had more. I wish everybody had more.

Certainly a lot of people don’t “have what it takes” as you state. And so long as we are training everyone to hide in closets and wait for authorities (but don’t worry! It’s a gun-free zone!) we certainly won’t be training or encouraging more people to increase their courageous virtue.

Running at a gunman when you’re unarmed and untrained is not a moral requirement.

I suggested that in the situation where you only had 2 choices - run at the gunman and try to overpower him, or stand by the wall and wait for your turn to get shot. If that indeed is the situation, then in fact you do have the moral duty to protect yourself (and possibly others).

 

[mVitus]

I’m not saying that any person is in the wrong. I’m observing that there is less courage in circulation than there used to be.

Alright, a misunderstanding from me on some of your points, my apologies.

Though when you say there used to be more courage, could you give examples of what you mean?

 

[ricmat]

Thanks for sharing your perspective. I got sidetracked by other responses.

I agree with much of what you said. The bottom line is that there is no sure fire way to get the bad guy. Any response will not be coordinated, and counter-weapons will need to be improvised. I suggested a lot of half-crazy stuff because I was trying to make the point that “doing absolutely nothing” ended up getting a lot of people shot. And in the case of Parkland, it seems that nobody was going to do anything, ever.

The plan to “be a sitting duck” is a disaster, and anything other than the sitting duck plan will require some courage.

 

[JimG]

I can understand your point. In times past it was not all that rare for bystanders to come the aid of someone being mugged, or assaulted, or bullied, or even to intervene to prevent a crime in progress. Now, it seems, someone can be mugged or robbed or raped in broad daylight and people will simply cross the street to avoid getting involved.

And I have wondered how one lone gunman can simply fire at will in a large group of people while everyone runs for cover. It seems if someone spots him as he is taking out his gun, he could be shoved, pushed down, beaten. I can see why it doesn’t happen though. If a school even suggested that students take aggressive action agains a shooter and the defenders ended up dead, there would be lawsuits.

There was a recent case of two men who overpowered a terrorist on a train in Europe. But that doesn’t happen often.

 

[ricmat]

In post 2 (at the beginning of the thread) I referred to the 9/11/2001 terror attacks. I’ll try to elaborate on those later…

Also, read about the saints. Unbelievable courage. I’ll try to give some examples tomorrow.

I’ll have to quit now because I need to sleep…

 

[Roseeurekacross]

too.

I live in a land downunder, where woman glow and men plunder…

Now we don’t carry guns in case of attack. It’s a mentality i don’t fully understand.

However we do teach self defence. This is quite important. What happens when you have no weapon.

Why do we teach self defence? Great question, glad you asked. So those who are being attacked

Don’t panic.

Very important. They don’t panic, recall their training, knee the bad guy in the baby maker,
Defend against a knife knowing they will get slashed in the process. They don’t panic.
Then run and scream.

Your theory falls apart because you did not take in the initial human reaction when confronted by the bad guy…fight or flight, or panic. And it’s not just women that their pants.

Please don’t elaborate on the 911 attacks. Watching a thing on tv is living it vicariously. What you think you would have done is totally different to what you might have if there. Let’s not disrespect those who died.

Now I will give you real life snap instant action to a threat, one without thinking. Living in Aus , my part, all snakes if they bite, will lead likely to death if not mitigated fast in ER. In some cases the victim only has 10 minutes to get that help.
My bro was about 8. A snake was reared up to bite him. My mother grabbed the snake with her hand and threw it against a wall.
Would she have done that if she had time to think. I doubt it.

 

[Cruciferi]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
As a Hylian Elder I present you with the Triforce of Courage. (Master Sword not included)

 

[Tis_Bearself]

You’re making huge generalizations. Whether someone rushes in to take a risk depends heavily on their own personality and also on the type of training they have received about how to act in a risk situation. Those who have had military, police, or first responder training will likely respond in the way they have been trained, which is likely to rush in and help in some way, although in some cases police have not rushed in because they were trained to “wait for backup” or “secure the perimeter” or some other thing that didn’t really work.

Those who have not had formal training do not know how they would respond until the situation actually occurs; however, as we see over and over, when it’s a case of rescuing people from a fire, flood, tornado or other disaster, a lot of fellow humans do personally jump in and help. I constantly read news stories or documentaries about fires where neighbors or passers by see people in a burning building and either rush in or try to help them get out. We just had a huge nursing home fire a few months back in the town where I work and the staff of the nursing home and a couple of the neighbors who lived across the street were rescuing the elderly patients even before the fire departments arrived, and saved lots of people.

When it’s an active shooter situation, people are less sure how to act because many of them are not armed themselves and most training for non-first responders and non-military focuses on avoiding the threat rather than confronting it. Many of us have gotten some kind of information from the media or even from our employers that if an active shooter situation occurs, you’re supposed to hide (or escape if you can) and call the police. Even so, there have been some cases where people try to fight back or disarm the shooter, with mixed results.

So I’m not sure where you get the idea that there’s some general lack of courage when it depends on the individual and how they have been trained to react.

Having two guys from a catechism class walk out on your speech doesn’t say anything to me about the general population.

And yes, most moms and dads would instinctually leap to save their own child from danger without even thinking and without caring if they lose their own life in the process.

 

[mVitus]

With 9/11, Bear and Rose have already expounded on it.

I’d also say that if your examples of courage are the saints, they’re special. In other words, not necessarily indicative of society as a whole at their time amd you’ve, I’ve understood, been talking about society leaving courage behind as a whole.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I’m accusing society as a whole. In the past, people who had never had their courage tested often performed with courage when courage was needed. In large groups of people, there were always some “heros / heroines”. I don’t see that anymore.

Mass shootings generally weren’t a thing until recent decades. What past situations are you using as a comparison?

 

[exnihilo]

I can understand your point. In times past it was not all that rare for bystanders to come the aid of someone being mugged, or assaulted, or bullied, or even to intervene to prevent a crime in progress. Now, it seems, someone can be mugged or robbed or raped in broad daylight and people will simply cross the street to avoid getting involved.

NYC is famous for this, but I think it is really a factor of whether we feel connected to the individual. We can actually go back to Holy Scripture and the story of the Good Samaritan. The Jews in the story didn’t help because the man was other, he was a Samaritan.

I think the increase in urban living, the purposeful destruction of American culture, and the radical atomization of the individual contributes to this. We Americans have nothing, and I really mean nothing, holding us together other than the all powerful state. That being so why would we help a stranger? Why would we sacrifice for a stranger? Of course we could say Christians ought to do this but sacrifice isn’t really a message of modern Christianity. And even if it were the wider culture works against that.