“Don’t fight from your front porch”. What does that mean anyway?
One recent MSB comment (in reference to current-events — BLM / Marxist rioting, pillaging, attacks on American civilians and their property, and general CW2 tactics) reads, “Don’t fight from your front porch, defend YES. Don’t stand before the raging elephants, you’ll get stomped into prison.”
One reaction to that might be… “’I’m sure as heck not letting them get close enough with a molotov to fire the house. Defending my family might mean having to make my case before those 12 scared jurors, but at least my kids will be safe.”
Others may have additional thoughts regarding “fighting from your front porch”.
THIS IS NOT MEANT TO CREATE ANIMOSITY AMONG MSB COMMENTERS ON THIS SUBJECT – just because I quoted some of you, and many have differing opinions. Rather, it’s a topic to discuss / argue – among sensible adults – while considering “what if” as we continue to watch the Marxist revolution unfold…
Dennis, a retired LEO said this:
Thoughts from “Dennis”:
It’s a question everyone should be considering sooner, rather than later.
“Don’t fight from your front porch” is advice thrown around on the internet.
It can have many interpretations, sometimes good advice, sometimes not so good. I’ll share my own personal thoughts.
What’s your situation? Is the threat local, or miles away? Are you the target, or is your neighborhood the target? Is the big city some miles away where the attack is occurring, or three streets over from your home? Do you load up your pickup and drive fifty miles to “join the fight” in an area you know nothing about the topography/geography or anyone on either side of the fight?
I’ll share some possible scenarios that might apply to me and my situation.
An organized group numbering in the hundreds has done massive damage to the county seat thirty miles away. Burning, looting, assaults on the citizens. They decide to go out into the countryside to intimidate the hill folks. Word gets out they have chosen my road, a gravel road six miles long, maybe ten full time families living on it, disintegrating into four wheeler trails where the gravel ends.
What should I do? Wait until we are sure of their intentions? Assemble the neighbors to meet the “protestors” at the intersection with the paved rural highway to prevent their entry into our domain?
Say we wait to see what they do. They seem to be marching “peacefully” as they
pass by the first four homesteads. Other than hurling insults and making a lot of noise, they’ve caused no damage, or hurt anyone. My phone rings….a frantic neighbor shouts over the line “they’re burning my barn!!!”.
What would I do? Personally…..I would come a runnin’….armed, and ready to take whatever action needed to stop the threat. I would expect my neighbors to do the same. I’m not fighting from my front porch.
Suppose they are moving on down the road, coming closer to my homestead, leaving the neighbors barn to burn, before I can get to the fight? Do I retreat to my home……or start giving them reason, right then and there, not to continue their advance?
“WROL” (without rule of law) is quickly approaching.
Some would argue it’s already here, especially in some democrat led cities/states. If laws were being enforced equally and fairly, folks starting a fight would be prosecuted, those protecting themselves would be protected from prosecution (persecution?).
Witness the couple in St. Louis that brandished their weapons, literally from the “front porch of their home” as “protestors”, with a history of violence, approached their home, crossing their lawn. The democrat prosecutor charged them, even though the guns were legal, their actions justified, and refused to charge the “protestors” who had broken several laws just to be where they were confronted. This is “WROL”. Thankfully, the republican governor over ruled the local district attorney.
Would it have been better if the residents of the neighborhood had confronted the mob at the entrance to the community to stop them there?
Under rule of law, we shouldn’t have to make these decisions. Police would be allowed to enforce the law equally against all. We are well beyond that now. Intentionally, I believe, because certain people in positions of authority, want, maybe even need, anarchy and chaos in order to achieve their goals.