Not to be a Debbie Downer, but with the mail in voting, there is no way Trump will win the popular vote. Thank the founders for creating the electoral college.
I know @Dawn has already addressed, but a couple additional thoughts…
What does a good commander do when faced with overwhelming odds and an opportunity to evade? Sacrifice the lives of his/her squad or tactically withdraw to regroup and fight again at another point? That’s not surrendering, that’s evading (and no it’s not semantics).
My wife’s safety is of the utmost importance, why wouldn’t I get her out of the danger zone as quickly as possible? If I stood and engaged in a physical confrontation, with the group how is that protecting my wife?
There is no benefit to staying in this situation if you have the ability to evade. You simply help add to the propaganda picture this group is attempting to create by staying and being the target for their taunts. @Dawn stated it well there is no reason to fall into the trap they were attempting to set.
A public restaurant is not my home. I get I may not have a duty under the law to retreat, however what’s the smart thing to do? Remember they have not actually committed any physical violence towards anyone and so at this point are simply a loud nuisance. Throw a punch first and get my head stomped in by 25 thugs? Draw and fire on unarmed people and go through the media and legal circus of all of that? Draw and potentially be rushed and lose my weapon and end up on the receiving end of my own barrel? Again, none of that protects my wife. Even if I was alone, none of that would help ensure I make it home to my family to continue to support and defend.
My home is different so a different set of rules apply there…but even then only to a degree in that the safety of my family comes first…so if I need to temporarily withdraw in order to take a more strategic action and that keeps my wife and kids safe…then that’s what’s getting done.
Side note: I do recall what drove out Manuel…my brother and his unit were actually down there for that one.
Sometime we just need to live to fight another day. Often we can do more by acting the insurgent or guerilla, than in an outright open charge.
The only country ever to beat us used that strategy…we were winning the entire time…until we looked around and realized we weren’t.
Can you be sure that if I wait by the river long enough, the bodies of my enemies will float by? I read the book too. And being a submariner I enjoy evasion as much as the next guy but when the oppositions torpedo doors open it could be too late. Evasion was our top priority. I can’t depend on the enemy not coming, I prefer to be ready before the enemy attacks. If we let the enemy gain any more strength we will be overrun and will have to surrender, evasion is the basis for a strategic attack, hence, those poor officers would be healthy today if they shot first!
You have to be as disgusted as I am at the events taking place. You must agree that the vote will be a joke. We are all that stands between chaos and liberty! Lastly, if they win, evasion will not be an option!
The enemy has already become arrogant, now is the time to put them down like dogs.
So, one last question. Why did we go after and kill Osama Bin Laden, he was doing a great job of evading/avoiding us, he was no threat!
Each day, each mayor, each governor, the mob grows stronger and stronger with the full backing of it’s political puppets. They have taken a page from his book! The opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself! Each time we leave the restaurant or flee from a store or run from their mobs we show our weakness!
I truly believe, that To prevent the enemy from coming forth, show him the potential harm. I think I’m paraphrasing Sun Tzu. I believe in the complete destruction of the enemy. You engage in war for one reason, to win! Look who is winning, and winning by attrition.
Shooting cops in the street and cheering about it is enough to turn some people into traitors, it’s also a psychological warfare! When enough people think about switching sides for their safety, we will be outnumbered 1,000 to 1
Ah brother, but as civilians we have different roles…
In the military I was authorized to go out and play offense as a defense (e.g. sneak up on the enemy and kill them), and whatever strategy maximized the chance of the mission success with the fewest casualties of my forces was what was used.
If I were still in the military and those were enemy combatants/agitators (assuming standard ROEs) I still would not have been able to engage them until they crossed a physical line (granted that probably would have been the curb) and then I would be authorized to do what I needed to stop that threat. But even in that case I could not engage first (again assuming standard ROE’s currently).
Yes I could send a patrol out later and take out the agitators, house by house to help prevent it from occurring again. But you can’t just wipe out an entire town with potentially innocents in there (and I’ll define that as anyone not posing a deadly threat in the near term).
I would disagree with your assessment of Bin Laden…yes he was doing a great job evading us…but he was still very much a threat…AND (and more importantly) he needed to be brought to justice to answer for his crimes and the world needed to see that as a deterrent and help ensure US future security.
As civilians under ROL (role of law) we are not tasked with nor have the authority to proactively go out and stop threats. And no I’m not happy with the way a lot of things are going down right now, but as a civilian I’m going to be mindful of whom I have to “put down” and reserve that for those that pose an immediate deadly threat to me/my family or some other innocent. If we go WROL, then that’s different (and I don’t think we’re quite there yet).
Protection of life is as far as our (civilians) mandate goes in my opinion, we’re not allowed to go on the offense. So If they’re not on my property and I have the opportunity to leave without anyone getting hurt (including on their side), that seems like they best course of action. E.g. Don’t go to stupid places at stupid times…(that’s John C, no me but I agree).
Interesting convo btw…the Ethics, duties and legal requirements/constraints of a civilian “sheep dog”…things to consider.
There are other laws being broken here. We’re in a time of civil conflict…and a clash of constitutional rights of individuals.
*Freedom of speech
*The right of people to be secure in their person.
*Disturbing the peace.
Reasonable people are beginning stand up against these protesters on that basis. Weak public officials, particularly mayors, failing to act against such actions, are causing people to provide for their own personal safety. IT’S DANGEROUS!!!
If you’re sitting back against a wall and get confronted by a mob of protestors with a bullhorn, once they get in your face, pulling a gun or using pepper spray both seem like a bad idea as you don’t have any room to maneuver and if the mob doesn’t scatter, you’ll be quickly overwhelmed. In the current climate, use of a firearm will also open the door for the media and anti-gun people to paint the narrative of you being a white supremacist and a poster child for the need to have stricter gun laws.
From the videos I’ve seen, they don’t seem to continue bothering people once they get up and leave so I’d look to be doing that before they get in my face. This is not good ground for me to get into a fight so I’ll want to avoid one as much as possible. If I’m stuck there for some reason, I’m going to try to just weather the storm, get video of the agitators and call 911 when possible. From what I can see, they’ll eventually lose interest if I don’t provide a response they’re looking for and will move on to other targets.
Once they’re gone, I can file a police report and have video of the agitators. I can also post out the video to social media with bonus points if I get them threatening me to stop filming them. If I get the sense that things are going to get out of hand, I’ll post the video immediately as at this point, I’m in a bad situation and unlikely to get out in one piece.
I don’t like being forced to leave a place where I have a right to be, but one person, in the close quarters against a mob is terrible odds. While being seen to give ground only encourages the mob, I hope that eventually, they’ll get too confident and make a mistake that can be exploited, hopefully before things get too out-of-control.
The other alternative is to gather a group of people and stage a counter-protest. The problem there is that with 2 large groups of angry people with weapons in close proximity increases the likelihood of a violent confrontation. With the current media and political climate, this is definitely a losing proposition even if you win the physical fight.
So what can we do to affect change in media and politics?
So deadly force is probably overkill (no pun, well maybe), but I disagree with @Dawn on this one. To say you will not let another person’s actions dictate your own, and then allow their actions to dictate you removing yourself from a place you are rightly in, is infact allowing another person’s actions to dictate your own. I get evasion of an immediate or surprising threat, but these people are neither immediate or surprising. They move as a mob with the sole purpose of disrupting peaceful daily life. I think the original poster has a point in that these people probably feel their tactic is not as damaging as direct physical contact, and if they were only screaming at you that may be so. However, use of a bullhorn to amplify sound and then place it directly in your ear is different, and damaging. I would contend it is a chargeable offense. So as to how to handle it…Yes you could get up and leave, but here would be my caveat, DO NOT pay for your meal. Announce to the others dining not to pay for theirs either and all of you get up and leave. Explain to the restaurant staff if they are willing to allow this to happen at their establishment they can afford the loss if revenue. Second option, warn the bullhorn offender to back off and that his actions are indeed an assult causing physical damage to you, use a less then deadly option if he refuses, be prepared for it to escalate to deadly when he or others push the issue. This is likely a very dangerous proposition and would require you to truely be capable of doing it without losing the fight. If you are not prepared or capable to perform the second option then you must concede and leave, just know that yes…the other guy has now won because this was all about intimidation. Sadly, while we preach avoidance as option one, we are now moving into “retreat at all times” as another “new normal”. Which IMHO is has only emboldened these POS to be more and more aggressive. At some point it WILL reach your front door. Why? Because we are all cowering in our homes, and it is the only place left they can come find us to continue to terrorize people. And for those who would say just ignore it…good luck with that. Unless your intent is to be a marytr. These people are bullies, and will escalate the physical nature of their intimidation until they get a reaction. Not sure who wants to be the first to set the example of being a victim after the bullhorn thing stops working, and it becomes dragging diners out of their chairs to beat them. Like any bully they only understand when the “little guy” punches them in the mouth.
100% agree with this option because the owners/managers of the restaurant need to feel the financial impact of letting this happen and not stepping in (notice no one from the staff was doing anything).
Did he win though? I got to walk away not having to shoot one or more people…I got to not have to retain a lawyer and fight off a potential criminal prosecution, and most definitely a civil suit. That sounds like a win to me.
Just because I avoid a fight doesn’t mean I’ve been intimidated…I’m simply saving your life.
So what are you willing to sacrifice just to" be right?" Incarceration, physical harm, your financial security? I guess I’m old enough now where I’m not going to risk all of that just for the sake of “principle.” To protect life…sure…and maybe even property depending on the situation…but just to be right? Probably not.
That same message needs to go out to BLM, anarchist, NFAC and anyone else who poses a threat to US peace and liberty and it’s civilians!
I appreciate your viewpoint. I guess I am thinking military and want to sneak up on the enemies as it sleeps and pounce! As a deterrent. Guess we’ll wait and see!
That’s the best way to attack (going back to you Tsun Tzu reference), so I ain’t mad at ya.
Unfortunately (or fortunately) that’s not our role these days.
Now what I would like to see is individuals like the ones who confronted the elderly couple, prosecuted for terroristic threatening and held accountable for their actions (because they were absolutely unacceptable). It should include a few months in jail.
I agree, sometimes we do need to live to fight another day. We are the SLEEPING GAINT.
While there certainly needs to be an ordinance punishing people who maliciously use bullhorns, you might as well try and argue that verbal abuse could cause stress and physical issues brought on by stress…in other words…you’re reaching on this one.
Welcome to the family and god bless you.
Welcome to the community Victor…
You are very right about having to decide what you are willing to “stand up” for, and accepting all the consequences that may entail. If you had asked my opinion a year ago, I would have definitely said walk away, but now it is not so clear cut to me. Boundaries are being pushed, and we are retreating more and more. Not even really over encounters that just effect you personally. These encounters are about the actions of one movement as a whole acting against another group, and how that group is responding. We are reaching a point were we may be standing up for more than just our own safety and that of our families. When I say they other guy won, it doesn’t even matter if you feel like the “better” person for walking away. To the aggressor you bowed down. He will now go on to assault another. And maybe that is not your responsibility to worry about…for now. But eventually it will effect us all.
But it wasn’t just the use of the bullhorn…it was the use of the bullhorn 3" from the individual’s ear, it was coming up and drinking the wife’s drink…if this was just use of a bullhorn from the street it wouldn’t be an issue. I don’t think it would be a stretch for an “assault” charge at all…or terrorist threat/intimidation…but then I’m not an attorney so I don’t know what all would qualify under those charges (or if they’re even the correct ones).