I don't get it

[nailz]

But, and I think a lot of those who respond to this thread forgets about this: some of us actually have a family now, some of us are parents. There's no way in hell I'd get involved in a fight with someone holding a weapon (knife, gun, whatever) unless my life or the life of those I love is in danger. There's nothing that can justify me taking that risk whatsoever. I am first and foremost a husband/parent now, and that is where my priority lies.

Sorry if that sounds like a cynical or like I would be "wimping" out of a fight, but my wife and my son are my priorities, not someone I don't know.

c.

That is my take on it too. I have a responsibility to my family. I do remember one time driving home from work, back in Buffalo, where I saw this white kid get off a bus, and 3 black guys who got off the bus jumped him. I called 911 to inform them of the incident, but I sure as hell wasn't going to get involved. I know I'm cynical about stuff like that and I do not care one bit (although I did feel kind of bad for not doing anything, but honestly, I would've just gotten my ass kicked as well). The fact remains that unless I'm sure I can take someone down with no threat to my personal safety, I'm done fighting. I fought enough in school, where there were rules. I don't get paid to police, and I'm not an Officer for a reason, just like I'm not a doctor.

Although I'm with J-D ... living in AZ is awesome, since we're a right to carry state (permit required concealed). I feel a lot safer if shit were to go down, that's for sure.

I did help someone having a seizure in the mall once. yay me!

 

[Yippee38]

That's the key word, J-Dub, SOME people. The majority of Americans (indeed, humans the world over) have NOT had any kind of training to deal with such a volitile situation. So yes, I think there IS a lot of armchair analyzing going on here. You and freakchylde are NOT in the majority, and when I see people, training or no, criticizing civilians for not trying to intervene, I get a little irritated. I've had both self-defense and firearm training, but I still can't claim I'd have jumped in and tried to help. As has been stated, until you're in the situation, you don't know for sure what you would do. Right now, all that's going on is speculation.

I agree and I disagree. I agree that most people have not had any kind of training. However, I disagree that that is the reason people would flee a situation like this. I'll get to that in a second.

You are right that I, nor anybody else, will really know how they will react in a situation until they are in it. For me to judge those in that situation is probably wrong. However, .....

I think the main reason most people wouldn't get involved is the same reason people never get involved: They are all too busy thinking of self-preservation than the greater good. I'm not saying that self-preservation is a bad thing. However, at some point, running away from a situation where others are being harmed makes you as bad as the people doing it. Here's a worst case scenario; the people who lived in the town near the concentration camps in Germany in WWII. To ignore it is almost as bad as being involved in harming those others. So what can one person do? Hide? Run away? It depends largely on the situation. However, my gripe is that probably 90% of people are so self-involved that they would never consider helping another person even if the danger to themselves would be minimal (for example, Kitty Genovese's rape and murder in NY where the people who could hear it going on couldn't even be bothered to call the police).

I will never know how I would have reacted in a situation like that. However, I can tell you that I feel strongly that if I'm not willing to risk my life and safety for somebody else's life, I'm not worth much as a human being. It's not all about making our lives better. Sometimes, we have to try to help other people. Obviously, the situation defines whether it makes sense to act or not. Given Nailz' story, it would have been stupid and futile to get involved. A one-on-one situation is a lot different, especially if that one person is especially vulnerable as this attacker would have had to have been.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

However, I can tell you that I feel strongly that if I'm not willing to risk my life and safety for somebody else's life, I'm not worth much as a human being.

I think that is bullshit, sorry. But in all honesty, what kind of human being would I be to my wife and son if I risked my own life - and their spouse/dad/FUTURE - to save somebody else?

c.

 

[nailz]

(for example, Kitty Genovese's rape and murder in NY where the people who could hear it going on couldn't even be bothered to call the police).

See.... that's fucked up.

Sadly, this thread reminds me of family guy.

 

[freakchylde]

However, my gripe is that probably 90% of people are so self-involved that they would never consider helping another person even if the danger to themselves would be minimal (for example, Kitty Genovese's rape and murder in NY where the people who could hear it going on couldn't even be bothered to call the police).

That, or they don't want to run the risk of "judgement" or accidentally stopping something that's consensual....

And yes, there is a difference between stepping in between two people, and witnessing a gang up on someone. I would never tell someone without training to jump into a row where 8 people have ganged up on one (unless it's the situation that my friend found him and his wife in, but that's a totally different situation). In all honesty, Nailz did the right thing, all you can do is call the police, yell that you're doing so and run like hell, hoping they don't come after you.

Regardless, there's always something you can do, even if it doesn't include anything physical. That's why, in this situation, I'm not going to call for the barista to be charged with anything. Not everyone is created equal physically, but being able and willing to see/use all your options is something totally different. I hope the people that ran out and didn't call the police are haunted daily.

 

[jaimek]

If you have the means to help someone out, you're obligated to try, but there are a lot of circumstances to consider in a very short flash of time. If the odds are high you'll get yourself killed or maimed, I see nothing morally wrong with gtfo and calling the police. If it's eight on one, interference will accomplish nothing. (I've seen this happen outside a subway station in Baltimore - I think it was five or six on one. No way in HELL was I going to get involved, but I did call the police.) If you're five feet tall and ninety pounds soaking wet with no combat training, you're excused. But if the attacker is alone, focused on his target, and in the open as opposed to holed up in a corner? Circle around and fuck his shit up from behind. If one person takes the initiative, generally others will follow.

You just can't definitively say yes I will or no I won't til you're in that situation and can evaluate the odds.

 

[Yippee38]

I think that is bullshit, sorry. But in all honesty, what kind of human being would I be to my wife and son if I risked my own life - and their spouse/dad/FUTURE - to save somebody else?

c.

I'm not saying jump into a crazy situation where it's 3 on 1 or something. I'm talking about this situation. Any guy who is of fairly average stature could have done something to stop this guy without actually risking your life. Sure, your life would be at risk, but only a little. You would actually be at more risk of getting stabbed or cut, but surviving.

You would be a hero is the answer to your question though.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

I'm not saying jump into a crazy situation where it's 3 on 1 or something. I'm talking about this situation. Any guy who is of fairly average stature could have done something to stop this guy without actually risking your life. Sure, your life would be at risk, but only a little. You would actually be at more risk of getting stabbed or cut, but surviving.

You would be a hero is the answer to your question though.

"your life would be at risk, but only a little" ???
That doesn't work - if there's the risk of me getting killed, I can not justify it towards my wife and son - no way!

And how do you know which situation is worth getting into? How do you know that the other dude isn't a navy seal, an ex cop or something?

Michael, sorry to sound bitchy, but unless/until you have children I really don't think you're in any position to judge what other people should do in such a situation. I used to be the guy who didn't step away from a good fight, but after I got married and had a kid my perspective changed.

I don't care about being a hero - it's a bullshit word. The only hero I want to be is the one who is always there to support my son, not someone who gets killed in a fight that isn't even mine to begin with.

c.

 

[J-Man]

As a father and a grand-father i can relate to what Claus said, your perspective on jumping into a potentially life threatening situation will change. With that said, i can also say, that being in the military will also have a profound effect on how you view situations. Would I have jumped into this situation, i would like to think I would have done something, but I don't know if i would have, you can't say what you would or wouldn't do until you are faced with it. I do know that if i felt my family or any of my friends were threatened then YES by all means I would have done something. I know this sounds cold and harsh, but you have to think also would someone come to your aid in a similar situation? Sorry but that is how I feel.

 

[Cheiron]

I think that is bullshit, sorry. But in all honesty, what kind of human being would I be to my wife and son if I risked my own life - and their spouse/dad/FUTURE - to save somebody else?

c.

A good human being. And one that hopes if the situation were reversed, somebody would risk their life to save your son's.

 

[nailz]

A good human being. And one that hopes if the situation were reversed, somebody would risk their life to save your son's.

I know what you're trying to say, but putting his son in that situation, even if it is hypothetical, isn't cool.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

A good human being. And one that hopes if the situation were reversed, somebody would risk their life to save your son's.

The "moral"/"ethical" stuff doesn't mean much to me in a situation like that. The fact is that if I go and get killed, my son is left without his father. There's just no way I can justify that.

I'll do whatever I can to get hold of the police and assist them with information, but if someone is crazy enough to cut the head of a girl, he is also crazy enough to attack anyone coming too close to him.

Being a "good human being" or a "hero" doesn't mean shit in a situation like that.

I've been involved in many fights over the years, probably too many (heck, isn't ONE too many already), and some where people pulled a knife on me or other people. But you know what? I have a responsibility that weighs way more to me these days than being a "hero" or a "good human being" in the eyes of others - my family is what counts, and if you want to hold that against me then fine. You don't know me, so feel free to judge. I'm saying, the better man is the one who puts his family first.

Now, with that in mind, how many of those here who say "I'll do this and that to the guy ..." actually have kids? Until you know what that means, I don't think you should tell us who have kids what to do.

c.

 

[freakchylde]

Claus, in minor cases, you yelling at someone and giving them that glare would probably make them run away. And yes, in some situations I'm actually serious about that.

That said, I know good and well that you'd do what you could, given that it doesn't involve putting your family in danger.

 

[J-Man]

All this talk of what would you do and why or why not. Most people can not, with any certainty know what they would do or not do, they can only say what they hope they would do. Knowing Claus as I do, and I consider him a good friend, he would do something, that is just his nature. What makes a person run into a burning building to rescue someone he or she does not know, or fall on a gernade to shield his comrades? No one knows for sure, or why they did it. it is said there is a razor fine line between a hero and a non hero, how do we define that line, we can't until the situation presents itself.

Just my $.02 worth.

 

[OrbWeaver]

I think people are far too hung up on this idea of being a hero. Fleeing a potentially life-threatening situation does not make anyone a bad person. In fact, in the situation like the one in the article, police would rather you get the heck out of the area. Most cops have the mindset of "better one person be killed, than some idiot try to be a hero and we have two dead bodies instead of one." It may be harsh, but it's practical. To quote Samuel Johnson, "Bravery has no place where it can avail nothing."

The murderer in this case was clearly psychotic. I could understand if he was in a rage and doing it - emotions make sense, but when someone is as calmly carving into another living human's neck as if they were carving into a Thanksgiving turkey, there's something very, very wrong with the guy. And to say that one would only be in "a little danger" is foolish. The guy had a knife big enough to saw off a woman's neck. I would not want to be stabbed with a knife that big. Unless he hits some place inconsequential to survival, like an arm or a leg, you will get seriously injured, if not killed if stabbed with a knife that big.

And while I'm with J-Dub on the concealed carry bit, if you have a gun and make use of it in that situation, you always run the risk of hitting the girl on accident, in which case the cops would haul your ass in as well.

 

[Yippee38]

"your life would be at risk, but only a little" ???
That doesn't work - if there's the risk of me getting killed, I can not justify it towards my wife and son - no way!

Then how do you justify getting into a car to go somewhere? There is definitely a very real risk to your life every time you do that. Hell, there's a risk to your life any time you do just about anything.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

Then how do you justify getting into a car to go somewhere? There is definitely a very real risk to your life every time you do that. Hell, there's a risk to your life any time you do just about anything.

That has NOTHING to do with the subject.

Going into a fight with someone psychotic armed with a weapon of sorts, is absolutely not the same as driving a car, walking in traffic or anything like that.

If you want to discuss the subject of this thread you started, then let's do so, but you seriously need to stay on subject.

I still say: if you think it's worthwhile risking your life AND MORE IMPORTANTLY the future of your family by playing hero, then by all means feel free to do so. I won't.

But hey, perhaps we just have different priorities in life, and then so be it.

I don't need to come across on a message board playing "the big strong man, who can take down an army with one arm on my back" to be a good human being.

c.

 

[Yippee38]

Well our perspectives are obviously different, and for very good reasons.

Actually, your argument is the only valid one I've seen here (from my perspective). You have a young child and you have a responsibility to provide for your new family. That makes sense.

OTOH, I'm not saying that by helping a stranger in need is at all about personal aggrandizement. In fact, I'm saying just the opposite. In fact, I'm saying what you are saying. I'm saying that at some point you have to think about other people and not just think about yourself. You are thinking about other people; your family. Nothing wrong with that. I am also saying that in some situation, I think it is worth the risks to my own health to help somebody else. In fact, there is nothing more worthy than thinking about the safety and security of other people, be they your family or a complete stranger first.

So in this situation, there is no way for me to know what the situation is of the person who called 911, or the people who fled the scene. They could all have been thinking about their children/families and their responsibility to them. I bet not though. I would be very surprised if any of those people were thinking about anything other than saving their own hide.

My whole point is that it is sad when our civilization is so wrapped up in each individual universe that they are afraid to take some risk to help somebody else. I guess my perception of the way this situation played out makes me believe that stopping this guy, even temporarily, could have been done by one person with fairly low risk; risk low enough to justify an attempt to save somebody else's life. Because who's thinking about that woman's children? Who is going to be their mother?

 

[booB]

What does having kids have to do with this situation? This happened in a college campus cafe, which was very likely full of college students. How many college students have a wife and kids?

The fact is, three or four young adults could probably have EASILY overpowered this guy in his disadvantaged position. Hell, ONE young adult could have grabbed a chair and thrown it at the guy, thus not putting him/herself in harm's way at all, and thereby at least trying to do something. There is NO argument that excuses the cowardly herd mentality seen in this situation.

 

[nailz]

What does having kids have to do with this situation? This happened in a college campus cafe, which was very likely full of college students. How many college students have a wife and kids?

As someone who works on a University that is as large or larger than UVA, I would like to call to your attention the fact that not everyone goes to college right out of high school, especially now, and that faculty and staff are just as likely to use on campus stores as students.