Questions to start rational thinking

Sometimes all it takes to get an anti-gun person to start thinking rationally are three simple questions and a statement.

  1. what would you do if somebody came at you with their bare hands with intent to hurt or kill you? The police are at least 3 minutes away.

  2. what would you do if somebody came at you with a knife and intent to hurt or kill you? The police are at least 3 minutes away.

  3. what would you do if somebody came at you with a gun and intent to kill you and your loved ones? The police are at least 3 minutes away.


This is good. It’s not insulting, argumentative, or condescending. It’s true. When seconds count police response time might as well be a day. Good stuff @Jonathan1.


I agree, they are good questions to help non-gun people start thinking through different scenarios and self-defense.

When I started my carry journey, I was very hesitant to carry. I don’t want to hurt someone else even if they were trying to hurt me. But if you asked me what I would do if someone was going to hurt my kids - there was no doubt in my mind that I would do absolutely everything I could to protect them.

It’s a different journey for everyone and we have to respect where people are starting from before we can even think of helping them start on their self-defense journey.


The answer to all 3 questions is simple.
Use the skills Keanu Reeves has taught us. 1) bare hands? Matrix! 2) knife? 47 Ronin. 3) firearm? John Wick :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Jokes aside, definitely good questions to ask. Simple, open ended questions that better understand how they would react to situations.No one is right or wrong.


What environment am I in during these situations.

At home, easy.

In public, not so much.

At home.

  1. Already trespassing, command to leave immediately, draw in attempt to stop a threat. (If the threat to you is 80 years old and your young and periodically go to the gym, your going to have a hard time justifying the need to even draw). Further action may be needed situation depending.

  2. Knife is a weapon, draw and command dropping it immediately, if threat does not comply and becomes a greater danger, take appropriate action to stop the threat and nothing more.

  3. My gun is on them and if that firearm is even remotely pointed at me or the direction of my family, if it does not drop immediately, the threat will be stopped, action to stop threat dependent on situation.

In public. Such things similar but with the added steps of carefully backing off while st the same time calling for attention. The the case of 2, drawing would come quickly and appropriate steps takes based on situation. 3rd would be similar to if st home.

1 Like

Jonathan1 very good break down and questions. I actually have been looking at this question, on emergency response times.
I only ask one question.
If you were with your kids, and a irate individual is coming at you, mad about something you not sure of, and they have a weapon (bat, tire iron, knife, ect) what are you choices, when seconds count? National average for emergency response (911) is just under 10 minutes.

1 Like

The questions are great for rational people, but sadly, more and more people today are not rational thinkers. They have been taught what to think, not how to think. The mantra for today is “listen, repeat, obey”.
The two strongest laws in God’s creation are procreation, and self- preservation. When it comes to you or them, instinct overrides most pacifistic thinking.
A slight detour here. A disabled person whose flight response is no longer an option, has only these two choices, fight or die. In your scenarios, if someone didn’t come to their aid, and they were armed, their only recourse would be to shoot them. Correct me if I’m wrong @Dawn, but this would come under the heading of Disparity of Force, would it not?
I do like the questions. I will use them in my future interactions with gun haters.

1 Like

You’re right, @Mike, it very well could be Disparity of Force - depending on the situation. There are some nuances that would be determined in the courts (ex. if the attacker had the same disability it would be equal force for the attack and lethal force might not be necessary…)

Here’s an older blog article, but the information is still very valid:

1 Like

1.Force on Force. I would fight back hand to hand. How do I know their intent, unless they yell “I’m going to kill you” which would prompt me to draw my weapon.

2.A knife is considered deadly force at striking distance. Draw my pistol and yell my intent to defend life.

3.This is tricky. A gun in the hand, is faster than any draw can be. I would need to close the distance to get within striking distance. That would give my family time to retreat to safety, and give me a better chance to disarm the perpetrator. If they don’t have a gun in hand, and have just threatened the use of one, I would draw mine. A verbal threat is still a deadly threat.

1 Like

Law enforcement and other training actually use the 21 foot rule. At 21 feet the advantage goes to the attacker. In most cases the attacker can close the distance on you faster than most can draw and defend. Think about that…

1 Like

These are really good and makes you think what would you do in those situations since they can happen and we never know what we may do that might trigger someone just because they didn’t like how we parked our vehicle or how slow we walked across the parking lot from the store and held them up for a few seconds. People are just stupid scarry anymore about what little it takes to trigger them.

1 Like

Good intelligent answers.

It is not the 21’ rule, that is a reference to the Tueller Drill that shows the reaction time needed to stop a threat and the distance an attacker can cover in that amount of time. This USCCA thread discussed that drill. This link explains that it was just the average distance/time in which it is a tie, wherein the attacker is upon you and you are able to put a shot on target.

The significance of the time factor is based on the reasonable standard that a person who’s trained in proper pistolcraft should be able to draw a handgun and place two centered hits on a life-size silhouette at seven yards in about 1.5 seconds. Before I go any further, I want to point out that both the distance of 21 feet and the time factor as addressed in Tueller’s original article, were both approximations based on training experience; nothing more.

This is directly from “the horse’s mouth” an article by Dennis Tueller from the March 1983 issue of SWAT magazine.