That was pretty slick: you created the straw man to lay the groundwork for your narrative and I missed it the first and second time I read it, and even responded to it - incorrectly. I'll bet most others missed it too - obviously Unclebob did because even he was talking about lethal force attacks.
No, I didn't create a straw man. What you claim I did there isn't even a straw man at all. It's clear you don't know what a straw man argument logical fallacy is, otherwise you wouldn't use them as often as you do. A different context is not a straw man, and you're the one who created the different context in the first place.
The topic of conversation throughout this thread has been being attacked with a deadly weapon and what one's response should/might be. You changed the terms to simply being attacked, which is a totally different situation.
No, I didn't. My question was asked specifically within the context of "with a deadly weapon," and more specifically within the context of a brick, since that's the context in which you made your statement. I broadened it to attacked in general, because anything, including a brick or a #2 pencil, can be used as a deadly weapon. You flatly stated, and I'll quote it here again for you, since you can't seen to remember it, "If some thug tries to attack me with a brick or any other deadly object I'll resist with deadly force rather than accept the unacceptable alternative." So when I asked you, " How many times have you been attacked and then defended yourself with lethal force?" It was directly within the context of "with a brick or any other deadly object." You responded by saying that you've never been attacked at all, which makes your "Personally, if someone tries to attack me with a brick they're gonna get shot. Period. End of discussion, end of problem." statement all the more ridiculous since you have no idea whatsoever how you'll respond if attacked, with or without a deadly weapon.
As I previously stated, you're out of your element here because anyone who has taken even the most elementary course for a concealed weapons permit or self defense knows you can't respond with deadly force unless your life or that of others is threatened with lethal force or serious bodily injury. Anyone who remembers the "stand your ground" laws discussed in the recent past will remember the concept.
For one, you don't have to have completed a CCW permit course or a self-defense course to know that. Two, in addition to the above, all you have to have in the moment is a genuine (or plausibly believable) fear for your life. That's how people get shot while they're unarmed or fiddling with screwdrivers.
So with that in mind, no - I haven't been attacked by someone threatening lethal force, and no - I certainly won't respond with lethal force to a simple attack. You decided to change the parameters of the discussion instead of staying on topic; nice try.
Again, no, the parameters were always within the confines of you being attacked with a deadly weapon or object. Nothing changed.
But to make sure there is no misunderstanding whatsoever, how many times have you been attacked by someone with a deadly object or weapon, where your life or the life of someone else might be in danger, real or imagined, and you responded with deadly force?
Wrong again; check the last sentence of post #226 and notice the word prepared. Also refer to post # 246. I'm reluctant to go into the details of my experience and training with firearms, but suffice it to say I've taken a number of classes over the years in handgun fundamentals, techniques and defensive strategies. Some people play golf or fish; I go to the range several times every week, not only to shoot skeet but also to practice with other items. I know what to do if I'm attacked by someone with lethal force. I'm sure this will be interpreted as more chest thumping, but so be it.
226 and 246 were long after your original chest-beating claim. But the above paragraph isn't chest beating at all. Educating yourself and knowing what to do isn't chest beating. But knowing what to do and actually being able to do it are two different things. Until you are put in the position of actually having to do it, you can't know how you'll respond.
That's cool; an attack by a knife-wielding thug dispatched with the ease of Jack Reacher. So cool that you don't remember the charges to which he pleaded? Most people remember every detail of a traumatic event., especially the punishment of their attacker. I'm impressed!
I really don't giveacrap whether you believe me or not. And no, it wasn't Jack Reacher by any stretch, I got lucky, pure and simple. What I did was quite stupid. And no, I don't remember all of the charges to which he pleaded, because not all of them concerned the incident in the parking garage.
Chest thumping?? Nah - surely not.
No, not even close. After the fact is different from predicting the future. But notice he fled with the gun. I got lucky that time, too. Instead of running he could have easily done something else, especially considering the the position I was in was one of total defenselessness. I had zero options.
