• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What truely should be your primary concern

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
http://straightforwardinacrookedworld.blogspot.com/2013/10/primary-decisions.html


I came across this quote today.

"While there is some concern of overpenetration with a handgun cartridge, your primary concern should be that your defensive round of choice will have sufficient penetration to reach vital organs and cause incapacitating blood loss in an attacker."

On the surface the statement is clearly logical enough, provided we remove one aspect of it.

"... your primary concern should be ...."

Lest you ever find yourself in a lethal use of force encounter...or potential lethal use of force encounter, sufficient penetration of your ammo is far from the primary concern.

Your primary concern is to make sure that what you are seeing is in fact accurate, ala use exemplary judgement.

And I mean it. THAT is your primary concern.

"Hold on a minute" you're thinking.

"If I'm startled from my sleep in the middle of the night to someone breaking into my house I need to win that fight short and quick.".

Of which I would concur with you. However, you still need to confirm that what you believe to be happening is in fact happening. Don't misinterpret what I am saying, you can in most instances come to the conclussion that you need to apply the lethal use of force very very quickly. In some cases a mere blink of an eye.

However, time and time again we allow preconceived scenarios other people have laid out for us to become our future predictors. There is a distinct difference between sitting at a red light and seeing pistol pressed against the driver's side window and, sitting in an outdoor cafe somewhere and hearing gun fire, followed by a guy with a handgun running in your direction.

Gun does not always equal threat.

Sorry for the white text on black lines text. For some reason I can't get rid of it.

Recently there has been a small spate of "can I shoot him/her if ..." threads. Those threads generate a lot of back & forth about just how long one has to wait/how much of a beating/cutting/stabbing/being spit on/etc. one has to endure before it becomes "OK" to shoot the person threatening to assault/assaulting you. That discussion emgenders discussion about how close a potential threat needs to get, without actually assaulting you, before you can shoot them.

As the article says (and goes on to explain) "gun does not always equal threat."

But how do you go about making the decision correctly that the presence of a gun does not equal a threat?

You really do not want to read how my thoughts about that are absolutely correct and the rest of your thoughts were pulled from your third point of contact - even though there is no chance I that might be wrong. So I'm opening this up for discussion. What do you look for? What do you consider? And just as importantly, what information do you disregard?

stay safe.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Just to start the ball rolling,

I would say AOJ--just look for AOJ (Ability, Opportunity, Jeapordy/Intent). A right now unavoidable* threat of grave bodily injury or death to the innocent. And, then work from there according to actual circumstances.

I'm more concerned with the deceptive bad-guy. For example, the one who approaches with his hand and weapon in his pocket at night in the gas station parking lot or at the gas pump. I guess this one falls under the category of maintaining distance by initiating the encounter while he's still a little ways away, rather than waiting until he's within arms distance. That is to say, I'll challenge a stranger approaching me in those circumstances, especially if he has his attention on me, by forcefully demand he stop, "STOP! What do you want!?!" "NO! Walk away and leave me alone!" That sort of thing.



*Unavoidable. Not all states require retreat, meaning, not all states require you to do everything safely possible to avoid a lethal force encounter. Consult your state law. This is not to be confused with deliberately going somewhere that you know there is likely to be a lethal force encounter. For example, if your girlfriend's dad says he'll kill you if you come to their house. And, then you go there anyway, and win a lethal force encounter with him.
 
Last edited:

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Good post and topic. Too much emphasis has been put on "Knife visible = KILL". "Possible Intruder = KILL". I'm not a ninja, no super powers, I don't intend to kill to protect property. For now, I can see two scenarios where I'd shoot to end the threat....

When I've ran out of other options. I'm down, or backed up as far as I can, or I see that the threat is upon me and it's going to be the aggressor or me.

The other scenario would be to intervene to save another being attacked. If one lives in a house with family members and there is a home invasion, the game changes. My moral obligation to protect will dictate if this is a no-holds-bared-event, or if the retreat of the aggressor is obvious, and I can restrain my impulses it could be kept to a break in and not a shooting. Home invasion with kids is my worst nightmare. Arf the Wonder Dog goes off if bugs hit the screens hard. If someone tries coming in, I'll be made aware and I'll know where they are.

I have no interest in hunting someone else down, or killing in retaliation, or to stop someone that has committed a property crime. The sound of breaking door glass and the sound of the door opening at my home should start the clock on weighing options and actions. Waking to someone in my room or in my face might be an indicator I need a better dog and that I'm about to learn the down side of becoming a victim. I think options will have been negated at that point. Somebody passes me on the way out of the 7-11 that just robbed the joint and everyone inside is still standing, I am not ending their life. I will be a good witness. Be my luck I'd miss the BG and hit a mother coming in for cough syrup for a sick kid.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP But how do you go about making the decision correctly that the presence of a gun does not equal a threat?

Depends on the situation. When I'm at the shooting range with a couple dozen other shooters, I don't consider that a gun equals a threat.

If I'm asleep at night and a total stranger is slinking thru my living room and I see a gun silohuetted on the wall by the street light outside, I'm gonna consider it a threat. That isn't to say I'm gonna blaze away.

In his book In the Gravest Extreme, Mas Ayoob actually recommended shooting the burglar who is armed with a deadly weapon, even if his back is turned. Ayoob's rationale was that the armed burglar has announced, by having a weapon, what he intends to do if he meets a homeowner. Using the upstairs hall as an example, Ayoob pointed out that if you challenge a burglar who has a gun, he can whirl reactively and shoot you before you can respond. Now, that book was written in the mid-to-late 80's, so I don't know if he still recommends that.
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Totality of circumstances. As already well stated, AOJ is a great place to start. Awareness is probably the biggest thing to work on. It doesn't matter what you carry or if you carry or how many you carry, the ability to see or sense the threat is probably the most important. Alot of this comes down to commons sense though.

Someone mentioned someone banging around your house in the middle of the night. Chances are at 3 am the crash downstairs and movement isn't aliens. It's probably a BG. Now why wold a BG guy be in your house? Sure, he could be there to use your phone because he has a flat. Chances are hes there to steal something and hurt you in the process. Obviously you have to be smart about this. Do you happen to have a teenage boy that lives with you? Well now the odds that it's a BG with a weapon just dramatically shifted. These are things that should be straight forward.

As already put, if that guy is approaching you with hands in his pocket at the gas station in the middle of the night, kick up your game a bit. If it was as teen aged girl, maybe not so much. I'm not saying for a second that a teenage girl will not stick you, I'm just saying chances are shes not going to or have the ability to.

I'm a big fan of gut feeling. As humans we've been evolving for thousand of years to avoid and sense bigger stronger things that will kill us. That "gut feeling" you have? Better trust it. Do you have to know exactly what it was that caused the feeling? No. Should you be able to articulate clearly why you dropped someone? Yes. You can go from that gut feeling, to clear facts pretty quickly.

So basically, it's tough to state exactly what to look for, other then the obvious, but I'd say your gut feeling is the best places to start.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Anyone who has a gun in their hand is a threat.....to someone. The home scenario for me is only a matter of "is it my kid, or not" if not then the BG is a threat and will be neutralized. Out on the street I prefer to run away (Monty Python voice) and live to run away another day. If I can't run away then all bets are off, now my top priority is, did I bring enough ammo.
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
To shoot or not to shoot is the action that all people who carry for self defense have to ponder.

Every situation is going to be different some well be very clear and others well not be.

The shoot first no matter what crowd is asking for trouble.

Pre planning, pre thinking and practice well go along ways to solving the problem in the correct manner
 

mustangkiller

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
300
Location
, ,
This brings up one of my biggest fears in a SD or defense of others situation. If I'm in a public place where a BG needs to be put down or worse multiple BG's and I start throwing lead, who's to say that a cop or another armed LAC won't confuse me as a BG? Or worse yet I'm the guy who thought that person A needs to be put down, when in reality they are a LAC just trying to help or save their own skin and now I'm responsible for the death of an innocent person. Sometimes its not always readily apparent who the good guys and the bad guys are.
 

Red Dawg

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
399
Location
Eastern VA, with too many people
I'd like to say upfront, first. In ALL 50 states the killing of another human being is against the law...SO, my preference is to not have to kill one. Self defense is just a "legal excuse"...Like getting tot he hospital fast for an emergency and caught speeding.. If there is any question of whether you should, or should not, then I'd say do NOT..If things have truly gone that far south, YOU WILL KNOW if you need to pull the trigger. The house game plan is if we can, she gets 911 on the line and I barricade us in a room, with grandkid, or whoever, and make it plain to intruders that we are armed, and the police are on the way. They can have my "stuff", that's why I pay insurance...but also made perfectly celar is do dot open the door to my bedroom....My guns are just another insurance if needed...On the street, There are WAY too many variables, but you have to be ready at all times, and do your best to avoid "that trouble"...A knife for me is not a beat all that requires me to shoot someone. But that's me, YMMV...I hope, and would like to think that a gun pulled on me within arms reach can be taken care of with less than lethal force due to training. Don't know...We'll see...
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
I am re-reading Bayes' Rule by James Stone, getting ready to read on in Jaynes' Probability Theory (2003). Apropos, on Stone's page 26 (it's not a big book), is this quote from E. T. Jaynes, "Seeing is not a direct apprehension of reality, as we often like to pretend. Quite the contrary: seeing is inference from incomplete information.

Stone's context is that he has just finished examining an optical illusion that presents an image of the Barringer Crater as a 'mound' by changing the perceived light source.

Jaynes' context is from Chapter 5 Queer uses for probability theory, Section 5.4 Visual perception - evolution into Bayesianity? "[ ... ] The general conclusion from all these experiments is less surprising to our relativist generation than it was to the absolutist generation which made the discoveries. Seeing is not a direct apprehension of reality, as we often like to pretend. Quite the contrary: Seeing is inference from incomplete information[emphasis in the original], no different in nature from the inference that we are studying here." p133
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.....
 

mustangkiller

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
300
Location
, ,
I'd like to say upfront, first....A knife for me is not a beat all that requires me to shoot someone. But that's me, YMMV...I hope, and would like to think that a gun pulled on me within arms reach can be taken care of with less than lethal force due to training. Don't know...We'll see...

A few years back I was in a fist fight that turned into his knife vs my gun. As soon as I drew my weapon he rethought his plan and I was able to hold him at the scene till the police arrived. The BG kept taunting me to shoot him and I made it clear that if he so much as took one step towards me or my inlaws who were about 20yds to my right that I would put one in his head and two center mass. He believed me and no further violence was necessary. A couple of the officers who showed up were buddies of mine (wife was a dispatcher at the time) asked me why I didn't shoot him even though I was well within my rights to do. My answer was because I didn't have to. Had he moved from his spot, I would have.
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
I'm gonna try to be very brief.

Primary concern in the gravest extreme, or in a rapidly developing serious situation, or in a puzzling situation that might involve a threat...

1) Time
2) Distance

In the coffee house shooting of 5 LEOs, the two distant LEOs did not run out the back with the Barristas, giving them time and distance. They took the 'bait' of the BG, and came forward, after seeing the three dead LEOs, to try to apprehend and arrest the BG.

Poor choice, role playing (being a 'cop'), locked into role, fooled by BG his gun was jammed (he had a back up)? Hard to say.

So, to avoid a highly chaotic situation with one option, find ways to get time (to think and plan and deploy), and distance (to prevent being in the kill zone).

Failing 1 and 2, cover or concealment. 3 gives you 1, 2 gives you 1, 1 gives you options, time to assess.

Not the full analysis but one simple platform.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Totality of circumstances. As already well stated, AOJ is a great place to start. Awareness is probably the biggest thing to work on. It doesn't matter what you carry or if you carry or how many you carry, the ability to see or sense the threat is probably the most important. Alot of this comes down to commons sense though.

Someone mentioned someone banging around your house in the middle of the night. Chances are at 3 am the crash downstairs and movement isn't aliens. It's probably a BG. Now why wold a BG guy be in your house? Sure, he could be there to use your phone because he has a flat. Chances are hes there to steal something and hurt you in the process. Obviously you have to be smart about this. Do you happen to have a teenage boy that lives with you? Well now the odds that it's a BG with a weapon just dramatically shifted. These are things that should be straight forward.

That's sttrange. Most burglars seem to be more interested in removing property than in messing with Harry Homeowner, and most of the ones that are discovered are more interested in leaving before being apprehended than in shooting it out with you. The exceptions get the news coverage - especially the home invasions.

As already put, if that guy is approaching you with hands in his pocket at the gas station in the middle of the night, kick up your game a bit. If it was as teen aged girl, maybe not so much. I'm not saying for a second that a teenage girl will not stick you, I'm just saying chances are shes not going to or have the ability to.

I'm a big fan of gut feeling. As humans we've been evolving for thousand of years to avoid and sense bigger stronger things that will kill us. That "gut feeling" you have? Better trust it. Do you have to know exactly what it was that caused the feeling? No. Should you be able to articulate clearly why you dropped someone? Yes. You can go from that gut feeling, to clear facts pretty quickly.

So basically, it's tough to state exactly what to look for, other then the obvious, but I'd say your gut feeling is the best places to start.

Gavin DeBecker http://gavindebecker.com/ agrees with you on that. He's one of my go-to guys for what to look for and what to do if you find what you weree looking for.

stay safe.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
I like Dan's take on this.

(paraphrased)
If you have a reasonably held, good faith belief, based on objective fact, that you or another innocent person is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then you are authorized to use such force as is reasonably necessary, up to and including deadly force, to stop the threat.

(quote)
"If a person reasonably believes, based on objective fact, that he or another innocent person, is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then he may use whatever force he believes is reasonably necessary, up to and including deadly force, to stop that threat."
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If it comes down to it, I ain't gonna be thinking about five legal criteria. If I think that mine are or I am in mortal danger and that shooting is the best option to maximize our chance of survival, I am shooting.

That's it. I'll leave the legal wrangling for later when everyone has time to think and evaluate at length. I, of course, will be reminding everyone that I did not have their luxury of time and exhorting them to arrive at their conclusion bearing that in mind.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
In the coffee house shooting of 5 LEOs, the two distant LEOs did not run out the back with the Barristas, giving them time and distance. They took the 'bait' of the BG, and came forward, after seeing the three dead LEOs, to try to apprehend and arrest the BG.

Would you please provide a link to this story I did a search with the above info and could not find one .

Most Likely I used the wrong info.

thanks
 

Anubis

Newbie
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
451
Location
Arapahoe County CO, ,
A bullet is just a WIMP from a different source.

My bullets are MACHOs, not WIMPs! :)

One very important factor in judging whether a perceived situation is what it seems is to see it develop from the beginning. If you come into the middle of something, you could misunderstand.

That guy holding a gun on a kneeling person? Could be a robbery or could be an undercover LEO making an arrest. That old guy tearing the pants off a screaming, struggling 3-year-old girl in the park? Could be a pervert or could be grandpa trying to get a bunch of red ants off his grandchild.
 

independence

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
339
Location
Tennessee
I think there are many good points in this thread. Especially regarding not assuming that you know what is going on without enough facts. I know one guy in real life who has drawn 3 times in situations where he was playing cop. Each of the stories he told me made him sound really brave, but they could have easily been a misunderstanding on his part. Ironically, they were also situations where it would have likely been enough if he was just OCing instead of drawing to prove a point. Gun toting citizens have different responsibilities than cops. There may be rare cases where it is appropriate to protect a defenseless stranger, but our primary responsibility should be protecting ourselves and those we love and only in situations where we are certain that potential victims are in certain danger of death or serious bodily injury.

I believe it has a lot to do with attitude. If you are like the guy I mentioned, then your mindset is bravado. If your mindset is good judgement, as mentioned in the OP then you have a decent chance of achieving the real goal: Survival.

Sent from an app instead of a browser simply because browsers on mobile devices are incapable of basic usability by design so that people can sell apps.
 
Top