Does Carrying a Gun Obligate You to Protect Others?

[@davidbillings1863]

The answer is NO.

[@emoney6191]

I carry for myself and those closest to me. If an active shooter situation broke out while I was carrying, I most likely would not intervene. Unless the shooter is close and can be considered an immediate threat, i dont see myself engaging. You very well could also be considered the shooter when police show up. You would have maybe a half second to explain yourself before getting blasted by the cops. I hope you can talk fast.

[@lubrew5862]

Exactly. I have had multiple cops tell me exactly that. Only engage an active shooter if you are in immediate danger. Cops in my area are trained to shoot first ask questions second in active shooter situations, this isn’t Uvalde Texas..

[@dariodicarlo8745]

Why wouldn’t you just reholster your weapon after neutralizing the threat? Frankly you shouldn’t even talk to the cops.

[@JohnDoeEagle1]

@@dariodicarlo8745 Don't even call the Cops until you are ready for them to clean up the mess. Be self sufficient and don't need their half baked efforts. The average CCW holder is more proficient and trained anyways. That's what the anti-2A crowd never realizes. They aren't your savior and any mistakes they make are covered under Qualified Immunity.

[@TheBeardHampster1979]

​@dariodicarlo8745 this isn't a controlled situation, you dont know who's gonna see you when you have your gun out, hell you could still be actively looking for the shooter when the cops see you

[@dariodicarlo8745]

@@TheBeardHampster1979 I do see what you mean however you could help mitigate this by calling 911 yourself they’ll want you to stay on the line anyways you could tell them you are armed and keep the phone in your pocket while still on the line with 911. Just an idea plus it helps to have the entire incident recorded in case you get arrested after neutralizing the threat.

[@ryanmoore7098]

😂 with that legal battle looming after the conflict (granted you actually survive), I’m absolutely comfortable saying, “No!”.

[@Spartanbladezzz]

Hell no.

[@WheelgunsOnWheels]

Short answer: nope.

[@carlosmorris4510]

For self-defense only, in my mind... If you're backed into a corner, you won't have a choice. That's not obligation - but self-preservation; if it saves others, then that's a bonus.

[@qumaden]

Cops aren’t obligated to protect others, so why would anyone else be?

[@JohnDoeEagle1]

Cops usually aren't on the scene for at least 8 - 10+ minutes. Signed contracts and insurance waivers the person is bound under oath and signature to step it up several notches from what a Police Officers duty and obligations are. They can always plead Qualified Immunity no matter what happens and get off.

[@davidspin5353]

Cops job is to jail and report crimes...

[@deborahbreeden4394]

NO. You can't instantaneously reliably and accurately determine the roles of aggressor and defender.

[@Marcelis]

I wouldn’t feel obligated to, but I wouldn’t leave people to be massacred either

[@JohnDoeEagle1]

It did for me for 5 years and 2 months at least. About 200 people and a entire building depended on me and my experience. The entire assignment and program was shut down by some ignorant broads. Now I follow Chris Cornell's advice "go on and save yourself take it out on me!" Cochise

[@oscarortiz860]

I am with you Yankee, I am not going to be a hero defending others, only my family 😁

[@annonymouslibertairian9120]

"Since you are a fire fighter, you would help us put out a fire if one started in this building?" "Because I am a firefighter and I know better, I will be the first one out of the building."

[@Tellnor]

My main responsibility is to my family and myself.

[@dn88s]

Exactly. That random person you're saving would probably trade your life for a new car if given a chance and likely doesn't support your right to have a firearm. Yet you're going to potentially trade your life or ruin your life and ruin the lives of your loved ones for them. I would add that women, especially, are famous for suing good Samaritans even if she is saved and no harm comes to her.

[@NewBeganningsAgain]

My Gun makes me a 🐐 Cause I have the best aim after the first 14 shots

[@keepleft]

Why did I read the thumbnail as "Dogs Carrying a Gun Obligate You to Protect Others?"

[@xkben90]

I live in a small town, where there’s a very good chance you’ll see someone you know at any big store or dwelling. If Im carrying and run into a SHTF situation, I’m not walking away thinking “not my problem.” What if there are friends and family in that supermarket that you’re unaware of? Now if there are cops all around, yeah, let them handle it. But if you’re in a situation where clearly nobody can stop the bad guy and I can, I’m intervening. Otherwise, in my mind, I allowed the people I love to become victims. The worst thing is for you to become part of the statistic of the bystander effect in your own hometown. I would hope the people in my town (especially the parents) would feel and do the same for me and my family.

[@ZColl-pb4cq]

When carrying any weapon you lose any right to anger

[@garrettlundy3959]

Obligate? My brother in Christ that is a series of felonies

[@JohnnyReb2000]

I think calling those who think they obligated to get involved in protecting random strangers "sheepdog" (and such people's delusion of being such) is a misnomer. On a farm, the job of the sheepdog is to protect its master's flock, not the neighbor's flock down the road. This, the actual "sheepdog" mindset, would be to put your family first and make sure they're safe from the threat, as Yankee says is one's first and foremost obligation in an active shooter situation.

[@AshGreen359]

No it doesn't, but common decency does

[@SMS2884]

Nope. Never will I get involved in someone else's business. I leave or be a good witness if it's safe. Those are your 2 best options.

[@libertysadvocate6485]

Your responsibility is to protect your family first, then yourself. Get them to safety first. If and only if after that you have an opportunity to help others and you are well trained and prepared to do so, do it.

[@unseenunknown7664]

If you Conceal carry no one would know if you stayed neutral. Legalities depending on state must be taken in consideration. I lost my firearms until the courts finished the case, they took 2 because the other was only there. Over 2 years without them.

[@noramoss]

Not even. Saving someone else may be a nobel thing and the right thing to do, but I'm not getting my life ruined so there's can go on.

[@josephhiggins7216]

Everybody needs training, hammerhead. As a civilian, husband, and father, it's my responsibility to protect myself and family. That said, if the most favorable option to achieve that goal is to stop the threat, then that's the right thing to do. What you don't want is a cop or another do gooder thinking you're one of the bad guys and shooting you.

[@AniwayasSong]

'LEGALLY Obligate?' No. This GOVT./COURTS/EVERY Agency of Law ENFARCEMENT, has no obligation to stop any criminal OR homicidal maniac, because THEIR SAFETY MATTERS MORE THAN OURS. 'Morally Obligated?' Morality varies from person-to-person, so that's a precarious perch to chat about.

[@MikeInOregon]

Does carrying jumper cables obligate you to jumpstart Frankensteins Monster if he stalls out running from the pitchfork packing peasants?

[@williammatthews2948]

Absolutely not.

[@quartierleblanc7326]

And if you're at church, mass or synagogue? What then? Depends on the situation.

[@TheBeardHampster1979]

To be fair, you're probably in just as much danger in that situation at the people around you, assuming you're not in the bathroom

[@DrMel22]

They chose not to carry 🤷🏽‍♀️

[@radiohobbyist13]

You can't solve any major problems with just potatoes. 🥔 🤔 🙈

[@gunmonkey6545]

There’s no responsibility, and depending on where you live, it might be crazy for you to intervene. Not to mention, if you are too eager to jump in, you may find that you haven’t judged the situation correctly. I carry a j frame for a reason.

[@matrice3]

Umm… no dude, you’re not required to defend other people if you’re carrying concealed. Dumb question.

[@SardonicDog]

No. Even police are not obligated to protect you.

[@CannaMike420]

In defense of your life or the life of another !

[@SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so]

No. HELL NO !!

[@HK-ou2ir]

Before you intervene, you need to know 1000% who is a victim and who is the perp. Civilians do not have qualified immunity

[@whelper4231]

I am not a sheep, dog, or any combination there of.

[@travish894]

Great video. Truth

[@jeffreygoss8109]

If police, who are paid public servants, have no responsibility to protect the public then you certainly don’t.

[@Yep-eo8dy]

Easy answer to this one is no

[@wolfpack4672]

No, being a man obligates me to protect others.

[@zachnelson7221]

Only if defending myself also protects them. Otherwise it's me and mine only.

[@davidl2048]

Absolutely not

[@joe_higachi]

NO

[@johnwilde164]

(Also) When the police arrive, the "sheepdog" could be shot by the police, because he is holding a gun. What if the "sheepdog" misses his target, and hits an innocent bystander? What if the "sheepdog" misunderstands the situation, and shoots someone who doesn't deserve to be shot? In short, mind your own dang business.

[@brianc9374]

Werent the good samaritan laws found to be unconstitutional?

[@Hutzjohn]

NO ---- everyone has the same ability to carry and defend themselves --- I possibly may intervene if and elderly person or small child needed help

[@thecheese4255]

No

[@MichaelSquares]

No more than having a jack obligates me to change others flat tires...

[@BirdDogey1]

Hmmm…no

[@NewBeganningsAgain]

If we want to be a hero we could become a Zero so no

[@chrismangold1630]

What happens if you accidentally save a democrat or something ? Nope, me and mine only.

[@JohnDoeEagle1]

If people are too arrogant and stupid to not have enough situational awareness to determine they are STILL in danger there isn't much you can do otherwise. Good luck and I don't think you will last very long.....I had Plan A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H all planned out and had a answer for ALL of them worked out.

[@johnfreitas8664]

I haven’t even watched.. no it does not

[@artwebb6939]

Nope

[@BigheroC]

Allah or Nintendo 😂😂😂😂😂

[@vikramgupta2326]

I know, really.

[@DrMel22]

👍🏽

[@mrcrhartman]

There is no legal duty to help others in the US, unless you have a special obligation as a cop, lifeguard, parent, etc. Your moral duties are determined by you and you alone. BTW...don't respond to me about cops having no duty because of the Supreme Court ruling. The duty of a cop to protect comes from the executive branch of the government they work for, be it municipal, county, state, federal, whatever. They can get fired for violating policy and sued in state court for nonfeasance. The Supreme Court very rightfully ruled there is no constitutional right under the US constitution to government protection from crime. It's a local matter for your community to decide, not a federal right.

[@JohnDoeEagle1]

Police are never held responsible for anything under Qualified Immunity. You sound like a anti-2A person expecting someone to "save you". They can't make it in time........showed up at 8 minutes and 24 seconds too late. No worries...not their fault dismissed!

[@BLACKWOLF-1911]

If you live in a state that has a "good Samaritan law", you have an obligation to intervene. Massachusetts is one that has such laws.

[@majorsynthqed7374]

You have no legal obligation to intervene in such a situation. As a bystander, there is no law requiring you to intervene or render assistance in an on going crime. Chapter 268, section 40 states as such-you have a duty to report crime, not render assistance during the commission of a crime.

[@MikeInOregon]

That’s for medical aid. Not putting yourself into danger.

[@lubrew5862]

Nope. You never have an obligation to intervene. Cops don’t even have an obligation to intervene. Good Samaritan laws are to protect you if you decide to, meaning if you help someone they can’t sue you afterwards.

[@artwebb6939]

This is not how Good Samaritan laws were explained to me, so I took the liberty of Googling it In fact that is not how a Good Samaritan law works, it is for the protection of the person acting to Aid others, provided they act in good faith, and expect no compensation, they do not create an obligation

[@SickAntired-t7g]

A good samaritan law does not obligate you to intervene. It protects you legally IF you choose to intervene.

[@davidspin5353]

Only if there will be obligatory sex...

[@xringarcher1440]

Why make a 10 minute video on a question that can easily be answered with one word?

[@georgejohnson-vu2zm]

I would hope you would find a way somehow to help another person if needed while staying safe yourself the best way possible or you can just take out your phone and start taking pictures like a tourist or just stand and watch the disaster happen or the Life go out of a helpless person or you can say that their life is worth the danger . Selfless acts can mean everything too many , people just think it through and do the right thing if it's one of my family members I would want you to try and I know personally I would do that for yours .

[@TedBerwick]

No

[@Marvin-b7o5n]

No

[@RicardoSkeete-xo6uw]

No