Saw an interesting contrast on the way to work this morning...

[Ezekiel]

So you were wrong to say the following?

By definition, a firearm escalates ANY encounter.

You think machete-wielding maniacs don't exist?  That would just be another bizarro world.

Funny you accuse me of having this "gun mentality" when I don't even carry one.

No accusations friend, it is merely a sweeping generalization of certain behavior I have witnessed -- daily -- from gunowners and "CCW-types" in prior work.

I think "machete-wielding maniacs" are in far less abundance then citizens possessed of "gun mentality."

Good catch on the "ANY", let me re-state (as I should know that, by definition, the absolute proves the fallacy).

"By definition, a firearm escalates ANY encounter to deadly force levels."  Better?

[Shalako]

So let's see here...if three thugs approach me on the street at night, one blocks my frontal progress while the other two block me in from behind, what happens if I:

a. break into my karate stance and thumb my nose like Bruce Lee
b. break my beer bottle and slash it through the air saying, "come on motherf___rs!!"
c. break out my ladyfinger sized can of pepper spray
d. unholster the Glock 19 with Meps and 124gr +p Gold-Dots

What's the freaking difference???

I might actually survive with option d. though.

Maybe I'll just be prepared to unleash any or all of the above options and keep a consultant on retainer to advise the best application of force based on the instantaneous rate of change of the percieved intentions of the attackers? I better hire a good consultant.....

[Ezekiel]

I better hire a good consultant.....

I agree: especially if you escalate to deadly force without evidence of such need being present.

3 to 1?  Maybe, with said "thugs" having done nothing but impede your walking progress, you could get a jury to acquit you if you gun them down.

"Don't be wrong or hire a cheap attorney."

My progress was impeded once, similar to what you say, on a crowded street in San Diego.  They were looking for United Way donations...

[Shalako]

I guess my point is that if confronted, I will break into "combat mode". By not remaining passive and being a victim it automatically "escalates" the situation.

So if three guys block my progress at night, they should expext me to:

a. bend over
b. try to fight

Anybody who expects either of those two outcomes is buying trouble. I would not fight to lose and if they expect to pick a fight with me they should expect the worst. Right?

[Perd Hapley]

No accusations friend, it is merely a sweeping generalization of certain behavior I have witnessed -- daily -- from gunowners and "CCW-types" in prior work.

OK

Good catch on the "ANY", let me re-state (as I should know that, by definition, the absolute proves the fallacy).

"By definition, a firearm escalates ANY encounter to deadly force levels."  Better?

You mean if it's not already at that level?  I would agree that presenting a firearm is a threat of deadly force, as long as you recognize that a credible threat of immediate violence is the same level (threat of deadly force) as drawing a gun.  To state it less technically, being earnestly threatened with a "beat-down" must be considered "threat of deadly force," unless you can see into the future and know that the "beat-down" will not seriously harm you.  This applies regardless of whether the threatener appears to be armed.  To be simpler still, if a person, armed or unarmed, convinces you that they are going to physically attack you, and you perceive a threat of real physical injury, you would be justified in pointing a gun at that person, and being prepared to fire if necessary.

But perhaps you do not consider a bare-handed attack to be "deadly force."  I think it is, unless you're talking about a six-year old.  Even then, Mike Irwin might have a thing or two of which to warn us.  

[Stand_watie]

s there a situation at the gun range to be escalated?

At every range I've been to there have been people. Some armed, some unarmed. My presentation of a firearm never once "escalated the encounters to deadly force levels".

..."By definition, a firearm escalates ANY encounter to deadly force levels."  Better?

Better, but still untrue. For example if that were true, police officers would be "escalating" every encounter to deadly force levels by the mere presence of their sidearms. Obviously your statement is a wild exaggeration, a generalization on par with "All men are rapists".

[280plus]

Yup, the police are a great example of a firearm DE - escalating a situation. In MANY cases most people think he's a cop, he's got a gun, guess I'll do what he says. granted this doesn't happen in ALL cases but  bet it does in the majority of instances.

Here's another, knowuing I have a firearm on me, I tend to avoid situations where confrontation could occur. Like the time the guy was ALL worked up because I left my car parked at the pump and went in for a cup of joe. He was being a MAJOR (expletive deleted) over the whole thing. I wanted to slam him in the worst way but I just walked away and let him think he was all tough and everything. Why? Becausde I was armed. So there we have an example where a firearm actually PREVENTED an escalation in a confrontation.