How much ammo is enough

[LSP972]

I guess you don't believe in dying well

I cannot speak for him, but I have voiced the same mind-set, so I guess you're talking to me as well.

What I believe in is not dying at all from the hand of another. If by "dying well" you mean running into the blazing guns and being the hero, well; be my guest.

I don't know you, but your statement to him was rather condescending and reeks of inexperience in the real world… the real world HERE, at home in the United States.

Then again, I may have completely misconstrued your statement. I hope I did.

.

[breakingtime91]

I cannot speak for him, but I have voiced the same mind-set, so I guess you're talking to me as well.

What I believe in is not dying at all from the hand of another. If by "dying well" you mean running into the blazing guns and being the hero, well; be my guest.

I don't know you, but your statement to him was rather condescending and reeks of inexperience in the real world… the real world HERE, at home in the United States.

Then again, I may have completely misconstrued your statement. I hope I did.

.

It is a mind set. It is often talked about in seminars/classes and I believe its referring to combat mindset and the willingness to fight and save lives. That is fine that you do not agree and think I have little experience, honestly you don't know me and I do not know you so that doesn't bother me. But The fact that you are OKAY with him saying the "sheeple" are on their own is disturbing to me. I have no image of myself as a rambo or going in "guns blazing" but I am not okay with having a weapon on me and not trying to make a difference after I secure my family. From your post I see we don't agree on this particular issue, no biggie.

I first heard this concept during a seminar from Dave Grossman (author of On Combat and On Killing) albeit he doesn't refer to it as dying well.
Kyle Defoor talks about his take on the mindset here and I first heard this term from him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vPCqMo9TCg

[JDM]

I'm not willing to orphan my daughter and "die well" for a bunch of strangers who for the most part have the same ability to carry a gun and defend themselves as I do.

That's where I come out on this one.

[breakingtime91]

I'm not willing to orphan my daughter and "die well" for a bunch of strangers who for the most part have the same ability to carry a gun and defend themselves as I do.

That's where I come out on this one.

Okay to clarify, the point isn't to die in the fight. It's the concept that if you have the means to positively impact the situation and you don't, you failed. Its not for everyone and that's cool but I don't want it to be referred to/thought of in a way it isn't supposed to be.

Didn't mean to derail the thread but I wanted to propose a different point of view and address the fact that people are being referred to as "sheeple". Kind of took a bad turn when my phone didn't post my entire first post and just the first sentence

[TGS]

I guess you don't believe in "dying well" (its a combat mindset thing). Which is cool but I think if there is a way to positively change a bad situation one should attempt to do so. Also calling people "sheeple" is disturbing to me, they are still people even if they don't share the same viewpoint/preparedness to defend themselves.

You're misunderstanding the term.

"Dying well" doesn't mandate you throw yourself into a situation without due regard. It has nothing to do with that. You can die well in any number of ways, and thinking things through and deciding, "Nope, not the time to commit. Tactical retreat, live to fight another day" doesn't mean a person can not die well nor believe in such.

[breakingtime91]

You're misunderstanding the term.

"Dying well" doesn't mandate you throw yourself into a situation without due regard. It has nothing to do with that. You can die well in any number of ways, and thinking things through and deciding, "Nope, not the time to commit. Tactical retreat, live to fight another day" doesn't mean a person can not die well nor believe in such.

Agreed, once again its a mindset. Not the actual act of doing it. Obviously to think anything is that simple as I do/I don't would be ignorant. Unfortunately this started a completely different spin off so I apologize. I'll bow out of this thread.

[WobblyPossum]

Forgive me for going along with the thread drift regarding intervening in random violence track but I've been giving a lot of thought to this, being a fairly new police officer. Off duty, my thought process has moved to think along the lines of civilian concealed carry because that's pretty much what it is. I'll have a Glock 19 and a single reload, no body armor, no radio. There's a badge in my pocket but there's a good chance responding officer's or CCW civilians won't see it when I clip it to my belt/shirt.

If I'm off duty and present when an active shooter event goes down, my first priority is the safety and escape of those I'm with, be they friends or family members. If the shooter happens to be between us and the exit, then I'll engage and "die well" if that's what it takes to get my people out of harm's way. Once anyone I feel I'm responsible for is safe, I'll likely go back in knowing I might not make it back out in an effort to help some more people.

I have absolutely no ill feelings towards anyone who wants to do something different. Breakingtime91, you posted a link I've seen a few times and I think it's a really good combat mindset talk, but Kyle himself said in that video that "there are no victims, only volunteers." The defenseless folks I'd be running in trying to help will likely be defenseless because they CHOSE not to arm themselves and seek training (Notwithstanding places like DC, NYC, Chicago, etc, where CCW is basically a pipe dream). I'm okay with knowing I'm risking my life for people that could have protected themselves but chose not to, and I'm also okay with people who won't take that risk. I'll never look at someone who says "I'm not going to risk my life or family well-being for strangers if I don't have to" and tell them that they're wrong. It's not that they're wrong and I'm right, it's that different people made a calculation and based on how they value certain things, they came up with different, but still completely valid/reasonable, answers.

[breakingtime91]

Forgive me for going along with the thread drift regarding intervening in random violence track but I've been giving a lot of thought to this, being a fairly new police officer. Off duty, my thought process has moved to think along the lines of civilian concealed carry because that's pretty much what it is. I'll have a Glock 19 and a single reload, no body armor, no radio. There's a badge in my pocket but there's a good chance responding officer's or CCW civilians won't see it when I clip it to my belt/shirt.

If I'm off duty and present when an active shooter event goes down, my first priority is the safety and escape of those I'm with, be they friends or family members. If the shooter happens to be between us and the exit, then I'll engage and "die well" if that's what it takes to get my people out of harm's way. Once anyone I feel I'm responsible for is safe, I'll likely go back in knowing I might not make it back out in an effort to help some more people.

I have absolutely no ill feelings towards anyone who wants to do something different. Breakingtime91, you posted a link I've seen a few times and I think it's a really good combat mindset talk, but Kyle himself said in that video that "there are no victims, only volunteers." The defenseless folks I'd be running in trying to help will likely be defenseless because they CHOSE not to arm themselves and seek training (Notwithstanding places like DC, NYC, Chicago, etc, where CCW is basically a pipe dream). I'm okay with knowing I'm risking my life for people that could have protected themselves but chose not to, and I'm also okay with people who won't take that risk. I'll never look at someone who says "I'm not going to risk my life or family well-being for strangers if I don't have to" and tell them that they're wrong. It's not that they're wrong and I'm right, it's that different people made a calculation and based on how they value certain things, they came up with different, but still completely valid/reasonable, answers.

Agreed, I just wanted to present an alternate mind set and address the term sheeple. I find that term and outlook on other humans disturbing. I don't judge anyone in general but I would never tell anyone they were wrong because they didn't want to risk their lives or risk their children growing up without them. Once again this a thread about ammo and it has kind of split of which is partly my fault. So ya.

[JDM]

Forgive me for going along with the thread drift regarding intervening in random violence track but I've been giving a lot of thought to this, being a fairly new police officer. Off duty, my thought process has moved to think along the lines of civilian concealed carry because that's pretty much what it is. I'll have a Glock 19 and a single reload, no body armor, no radio. There's a badge in my pocket but there's a good chance responding officer's or CCW civilians won't see it when I clip it to my belt/shirt.

If I'm off duty and present when an active shooter event goes down, my first priority is the safety and escape of those I'm with, be they friends or family members. If the shooter happens to be between us and the exit, then I'll engage and "die well" if that's what it takes to get my people out of harm's way. Once anyone I feel I'm responsible for is safe, I'll likely go back in knowing I might not make it back out in an effort to help some more people.

I have absolutely no ill feelings towards anyone who wants to do something different. Breakingtime91, you posted a link I've seen a few times and I think it's a really good combat mindset talk, but Kyle himself said in that video that "there are no victims, only volunteers." The defenseless folks I'd be running in trying to help will likely be defenseless because they CHOSE not to arm themselves and seek training (Notwithstanding places like DC, NYC, Chicago, etc, where CCW is basically a pipe dream). I'm okay with knowing I'm risking my life for people that could have protected themselves but chose not to, and I'm also okay with people who won't take that risk. I'll never look at someone who says "I'm not going to risk my life or family well-being for strangers if I don't have to" and tell them that they're wrong. It's not that they're wrong and I'm right, it's that different people made a calculation and based on how they value certain things, they came up with different, but still completely valid/reasonable, answers.

Excellent post!

[WobblyPossum]

Agreed, I just wanted to present an alternate mind set and address the term sheeple. I find that term and outlook on other humans disturbing.

I'm with you on the sheeple thing. I hate the whole sheep/sheepdog way of explaining these concepts to people. The first-world society we live in today means that, for most people, violence is an entirely academic exercise. That's not a bad thing. It's actually a very good one. Yeah, that results in many people not even considering the idea that the world is still a dangerous place and they could find themselves in a violent situation. I think it's wrong to look down on those people and using words like "sheeple" isn't doing anyone any favors. It's not these people's fault that our society as a whole is pretty soft. It's the world they were born into. Things like combat mindset aren't just passed on to people through their DNA, they have to be taught and trained.