TexasCHLforum.com

That's why i don't live in Cali any more. Evil exists when good folks let it exist. Calif and NY are full of moral decay. How did only 80,000 Nazis kill over 6 MILLION Allied soldiers and European citizens? Because those people were selfish and did not help each other. Some of these people actually actively ratted out their fellow man to gain favor with their Nazi overlords. Sadly, such is much of human nature for much of humanity. I had a blown tire the other day and a guy stopped his pickup and offered to help. I've done so for others, too. that's why I live in the great state of Texas.

Abraham wrote:C-dub,

I don't know for certain that they wouldn't, but I'd sure not want to be the one to test them.

jt88,

"No one is ever going to get prosecuted for popping a mass shooter."

I wouldn't want to test that idea either.

I have to agree you wouldn't even see a grand jury for dropping a mass shooter. However if you missed and hit someone else? Even if you did get the bad guy I can see them going after you for that (depending on location). Whatever DA went after you for the actual mass shooter killing/wounding would get crucified by the public. I'm not as for sure about public support for hitting a bystander while doing that though. Just my thoughts on it.

Same argument for why doctors won't stop at the scene of an accident. Isn't that why Good Samaritan laws were started? Need Good Samaritan laws for active shooter situation. Commiefornia will never do it but perhaps Texas would.

rotor wrote:Same argument for why doctors won't stop at the scene of an accident. Isn't that why Good Samaritan laws were started? Need Good Samaritan laws for active shooter situation. Commiefornia will never do it but perhaps Texas would.

This is what I've heard, so who knows how true it is. That our good Samaritan laws don't protect actual medical professionals. So if I stop I'm covered, if a doctor/nurse/paramedic stops they aren't. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Those are the people you want to stop and help.

Jago668 wrote:

rotor wrote:Same argument for why doctors won't stop at the scene of an accident. Isn't that why Good Samaritan laws were started? Need Good Samaritan laws for active shooter situation. Commiefornia will never do it but perhaps Texas would.

This is what I've heard, so who knows how true it is. That our good Samaritan laws don't protect actual medical professionals. So if I stop I'm covered, if a doctor/nurse/paramedic stops they aren't. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Those are the people you want to stop and help.

I have not been a paramedic since 1996. I was taught that the Good Samaritan laws protects even medical professionals as long as the person acted and performed to the level they have been trained to. Performing acts and procedures one is not trained to do is where people go wrong. Also not performing correctly to one;s training is what gets you in trouble. If you are going to do CPR, do it correctly.

The same applies to responding to a shooter. Shooting innocent bystanders is not doing it correctly. Perform to the level you are trained.

jt88 wrote:I would never run towards danger, unless I knew that a loved one was in harm's way. Otherwise, I would try to retreat.

Yes, and there's the scenario when the wife and I are shopping a Big Box store, and as usual, at opposite ends of the building. If shooting starts, until I know she's out in the parking lot, how can I leave for same without her? Second worst scenario, I'm trying to find her to get out and she's already been out, putting me in two modes - self defense and rescue without warrant for it.

So, here's where everyone you love having and using a cell phone, with a plan, is prudent planning.

anygunanywhere wrote:

Jago668 wrote:

rotor wrote:Same argument for why doctors won't stop at the scene of an accident. Isn't that why Good Samaritan laws were started? Need Good Samaritan laws for active shooter situation. Commiefornia will never do it but perhaps Texas would.

This is what I've heard, so who knows how true it is. That our good Samaritan laws don't protect actual medical professionals. So if I stop I'm covered, if a doctor/nurse/paramedic stops they aren't. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Those are the people you want to stop and help.

I have not been a paramedic since 1996. I was taught that the Good Samaritan laws protects even medical professionals as long as the person acted and performed to the level they have been trained to. Performing acts and procedures one is not trained to do is where people go wrong. Also not performing correctly to one;s training is what gets you in trouble. If you are going to do CPR, do it correctly.

The same applies to responding to a shooter. Shooting innocent bystanders is not doing it correctly. Perform to the level you are trained.

Perhaps I didn't make my first post clear. Good Samaritan laws were passed so that doctors would stop and render aid and supposedly not have to fear lawsuits. Now perhaps we need Good Samaritan laws to protect LTC holders in an active shooter situation. Give them immunity from civil and criminal prosecution. To be honest, even with Good Sam laws I don't know if I would rush into possible harms way. My .380 with 6 rounds isn't much. Just being honest.

rotor wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

Jago668 wrote:

rotor wrote:Same argument for why doctors won't stop at the scene of an accident. Isn't that why Good Samaritan laws were started? Need Good Samaritan laws for active shooter situation. Commiefornia will never do it but perhaps Texas would.

This is what I've heard, so who knows how true it is. That our good Samaritan laws don't protect actual medical professionals. So if I stop I'm covered, if a doctor/nurse/paramedic stops they aren't. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Those are the people you want to stop and help.

I have not been a paramedic since 1996. I was taught that the Good Samaritan laws protects even medical professionals as long as the person acted and performed to the level they have been trained to. Performing acts and procedures one is not trained to do is where people go wrong. Also not performing correctly to one;s training is what gets you in trouble. If you are going to do CPR, do it correctly.

The same applies to responding to a shooter. Shooting innocent bystanders is not doing it correctly. Perform to the level you are trained.

Perhaps I didn't make my first post clear. Good Samaritan laws were passed so that doctors would stop and render aid and supposedly not have to fear lawsuits. Now perhaps we need Good Samaritan laws to protect LTC holders in an active shooter situation. Give them immunity from civil and criminal prosecution. To be honest, even with Good Sam laws I don't know if I would rush into possible harms way. My .380 with 6 rounds isn't much. Just being honest.

Applying Good Samaritan laws to those who respond to shootings and other events makes sense, but in doing so it does not excuse someone from responding in a manner that harms the innocent because the responder tries something they are not trained to do.

Breny414 wrote:I don't know... sounds like he's talking about running toward a situation that you could otherwise escape. To me that is borderline trying to be law enforcement. Hopefully there is enough saturation of LTC folks out there that there would be no need.

As he explained in the video, he is one of maybe 1,500 licensed carriers in a county with a population of several millions. There is no such thing as CHL/LTC saturation in California.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Breny414 wrote:I don't know... sounds like he's talking about running toward a situation that you could otherwise escape. To me that is borderline trying to be law enforcement. Hopefully there is enough saturation of LTC folks out there that there would be no need.

As he explained in the video, he is one of maybe 1,500 licensed carriers in a county with a population of several millions. There is no such thing as CHL/LTC saturation in California.

Good point.