bro, not listening to you on this anymore.
You’ve got a lot of pointing fingers, and two of them are clearly in your own ears.
Have a nice day. Please do not reply here to me, on this. we’re done talking on this.
2 Likes
nor are you going to hold him solely responsible, because you aren’t personalizing it.
Let’s say there’s a 2% chance the lady in the back was going to get shot without him intervening. And let’s say that when the gunman pointed the gun at the woman and mustache grabbed him that chance shot up to 10%.
There’s still a 90% chance that the lady wouldn’t get shot. But that doesn’t make mustache’s decision a good one.
1 Like
Here’s the thing. In a moment like this, for most people, the cold light of reason is unavailable. Utterly. You might disagree with me that that applies to most (I would say nearly all) people, but you’ve never faced a life-threatening physical attack, have you? So you get to be this hyper-rational person blissfully unaware of what a house of cards your beloved rationality is, in the face of violence. You know, I really doubt you’ll be able to see what I’m trying to tell you here… I’m probably wasting my time. 
3 Likes
To be frank, like Boris, I feel you have no credibility in this discussion, it’s not one I’m particularly interested in spending more time on, so I bid you adieu.
4 Likes
I completely agree with you. He was overwhelmed with emotion and did something stupid as a result.
The fact that he was provoked and reacted emotionally and the fact that this is understandable doesn’t make the actions he undertook any less risky.
I’ve already admitted that I don’t know what I’d do in a situation like this, but I said that I’d hope that I wouldn’t put the lives of others at risk unnecessarily like this guy did.
My last comment – for all YOU know, the gunman was seconds away from executing everyone in that store, and the old feller saved everyone’s lives. Assuming the person waving a gun in your face is NOT about to commit acts of heinous violence is idiotic. You’d be useless in a situation with an active shooter, that seems obvious. “Attacking them is just going to make them more angry!” Aye aye aye, you be canon fodder if you want. I outtie.
3 Likes
I’m the only one who has cited any sources or provided solid reasoning for my statements. I’ve also patiently responded to people who were being pretty rude. You have no obligation to engage with me, obviously, but you also have no grounds for impeaching my credibility.
(Uh, especially when you cite your kiddie karate instructor as your source on how to deal with an armed mugger.)
I already addressed this argument at length and cited sources supporting my position. I guess you’re dismissing my arguments without actually reading and considering them?
To repeat, there’s a small risk of an armed robber executing everyone in the store. There’s a large risk of an armed mugger becoming violent when attacked. Therefore, attacking an armed mugger increases the chance of violence.
3 Likes
Do you think if you faced such a situation, and found that you were unable to think logically in the moment, that you would then reevaluate what it is that you consider “stupid”? And maybe stop calling people out for failing to uphold an impossible standard, that you have invented in your imagination?
2 Likes
I think that if I was unable to think logically in the moment I would be incapable of reevaluating anything because doing so would require thinking logically.
I might very well do something stupid. It would be understandable because I would not have been thinking logically. But it still would be a stupid thing to do.
- I haven’t invented it in my imagination. I cited the advice of several expert sources all saying the same thing: don’t attack the guy with the gun.
- I don’t think “don’t attack the guy with the gun” is an impossible standard. I think most armed robberies don’t involve attacking the guy with the gun.
- The reason I’m calling the guy out is because I want to emphasize that it’s a bad thing to do to discourage others from trying to do the same thing. I understand situations like this are emotionally charged and it’s hard to know what to do. All the more reason when discussing these situations to emphasize that the best course of action is not to put the guy with the gun in a position where he thinks he needs to use it.
2 Likes
14 Likes
Well, mustache man isn’t here, but I imagine he’d say “I took down a guy with a gun without anyone else getting hurt. Watchoo done, son?”
You can’t win this one, friend. Results matter a lot more than armchair “but it coulda gone different” speculation, and mustache man’s results are unimpeachable.
7 Likes
It looks like there’s some right there on the end cap of aisle one. 
2 Likes
Okay, what I noticed is that the cashier had no reaction at all. None. I’m speculating that this is not her first time in this situation. Given that this takes place in Monterrey, maybe they ALL have been to this particular rodeo before.
4 Likes
Still, that was some badass calf roping right there at the end.
1 Like
In this case, the results are cherry-picked.
As I’ve already pointed out, your argument is logically equivalent to:
“Well, I drove drunk and didn’t get in an accident. Results are what matter, not “it coulda gone different” speculation. Therefore, my drunk driving is unimpeachable.”
Mustache’s actions were only good or wise or smart if the same actions repeated in many similar situations would consistently lead to better results than not doing so. They aren’t, because fights are unpredictable, and unpredictability and guns do not mix very well.
If you disagree, fine. But please make a better argument than “I don’t understand probability at all.”
1 Like
I think that’s your post-hoc rationalization. The reason you’re calling the guy out is because you’ve invested a lot in logic and reason, many other people don’t think that way, and you’re frustrated that they don’t credit you for having (what you think of as) strong mental fortitude to resist emotional impulses. You see this person as wrongly receiving the praise that you rightly deserve, and it irks you.
1 Like
As has already been pointed out, there is no logical equivalency between choosing to take high risk actions when you are in no other danger, and trying to control the situation when you are already in extreme danger. Your analogy does not work at all.
What strange criteria! But nonetheless, individuals consistently reacting to aggressors by attacking them consistently leads to better results for society. This is the lesson of the honeybee.
7 Likes
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a mustache.
And if we outlaw mustaches, only outlaws will have mustaches.
12 Likes
Mustache man’s mustache is unimpeachable.
8 Likes
