Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: How to separate yourself

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I hope this is the proper place to post this, it is the best fit I found .

    I am curious as to the suggestion, ideas, experience this brings forth.

    1) If you were confronted in by someone with a firearm, how would you react, would you pull your gun immediately (cc or oc)?

    2) If a home invasion was in progress and you were caught off gaurd (sleeping perhaps), and you were being held hostage, how would you diffuse the situation or separate yourself from the situation to gain access to your firearm.

    Feel free to answer either or both questions, like I said, maybe I can take some advice from the rest of you and keep it in mind.

    -Ryan

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    I hope this is the proper place to post this, it is the best fit I found .

    I am curious as to the suggestion, ideas, experience this brings forth.

    1) If you were confronted in by someone with a firearm, how would you react, would you pull your gun immediately (cc or oc)?

    2) If a home invasion was in progress and you were caught off gaurd (sleeping perhaps), and you were being held hostage, how would you diffuse the situation or separate yourself from the situation to gain access to your firearm.

    Feel free to answer either or both questions, like I said, maybe I can take some advice from the rest of you and keep it in mind.

    -Ryan
    Getting a little "tunnel vision" on the gun, I think. Broaden the scope a bit.

    Generally, I don't think you're gonna beat a drawn gun. 1.25-2 seconds, if that is an average draw time, is a long time available for the other guy to pull the trigger.

    I think you're going to have to look to other options.

    Also, the possible scenarios are far too numerous. You'll need to define the circumstances a good bit, I'm thinking.

    Is he talking, or has he already shot your spouse? Is he suicidal? Are you tied up? Etc.

    It may be that the best bet is to wait til he turns his back and you and your spouse just dive out the window and leave the gun in the nightstand drawer.



    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  3. #3
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Getting a little "tunnel vision" on the gun, I think. Broaden the scope a bit.

    Generally, I don't think you're gonna beat a drawn gun. 1.25-2 seconds, if that is an average draw time, is a long time available for the other guy to pull the trigger.

    I think you're going to have to look to other options.

    Also, the possible scenarios are far too numerous. You'll need to define the circumstances a good bit, I'm thinking.

    Is he talking, or has he already shot your spouse? Is he suicidal? Are you tied up? Etc.

    It may be that the best bet is to wait til he turns his back and you and your spouse just dive out the window and leave the gun in the nightstand drawer.
    I agree it's a gun first/gun only kind of premise in the OP. Not good for scenario excercises...

    Unfortunately, some people are constrained to think gun first/gun only. They think they can just whip it out and "the threat would have been neutralized."

    Reality, as you point out, Citizen, is actually a lot more complicated.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pinal County, AZ, ,
    Posts
    164

    Post imported post

    According to "Principles of Self Defense" by Jeff Cooper, the response should be an EXPLOSIVE COUNTERATTACK with whatever is available. I'm confident that my dog would provide the 2 or 3 seconds required to grab the pistol and acquire a target.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Well, I was not trying to focus only on the gun. But I guess I did :?.

    Was just trying to create something interesting, make up your own scenario if you like...


  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Getting a little "tunnel vision" on the gun, I think. Broaden the scope a bit.

    Generally, I don't think you're gonna beat a drawn gun. 1.25-2 seconds, if that is an average draw time, is a long time available for the other guy to pull the trigger.

    I think you're going to have to look to other options.

    Also, the possible scenarios are far too numerous. You'll need to define the circumstances a good bit, I'm thinking.

    Is he talking, or has he already shot your spouse? Is he suicidal? Are you tied up? Etc.

    It may be that the best bet is to wait til he turns his back and you and your spouse just dive out the window and leave the gun in the nightstand drawer.
    I agree it's a gun first/gun only kind of premise in the OP. Not good for scenario excercises...

    Unfortunately, some people are constrained to think gun first/gun only. They think they can just whip it out and "the threat would have been neutralized."

    Reality, as you point out, Citizen, is actually a lot more complicated.
    Yes, you are right, in my house it is gun first/only if you are in my home and I don't know you and you are here to cause harm. I would waive the nicities for that scenario...

    If someone is in my home I am not going to fiddle around with anything else other that something that will end his life - fast.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    I was cajacked/kidnapped at gunpoint before. The guy got the drop on me and it wouldn't have mattered if I had a gun - there's NO WAY it would have helped. I wasn't armed on that occasion (it was before I carried) anyway, so it was all I could do to effect an escape. I ended up jumping out of a moving car (my car) to get away from the guy. I was nearly run over by cars behind us, but I limped to a phone and got the cops on him immediately. The best thing I did on that occasion was to have memorized my license plate number, so that the police could positively ID the car. Your brain is your best weapon, without doubt.

    There is no set of rules that will govern every contingency. Be alert and improvise a solution as best you can. Be aware that it may not work. These situations are life-and-death, and there is no room for mistakes.

    -ljp


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , New York, USA
    Posts
    122

    Post imported post

    When you see a person next to you with a gun you use GUN

    Grab

    Undo

    Neutralize

    or so I'm told....Im sure it works for Steven Segal in the movies but I have never had the opportunity to try it.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    If someone is in my home I am not going to fiddle around with anything else other that something that will end his life - fast.
    To protect yourself legally, you should be discussing stopping the threat to you or your family's lives, not ending someone else's life.

    In practice, of course, these may have the same results, since you are using deadly force, but you focus should always be on stopping threats, not killing.

    If somebody were to break into your house tonight and your defense results in his death, a zealous prosecuter will find this forum, and this post, after searching your hard drive, and may try to use it against you. The internet is not always your friend.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Legba wrote:
    ...SNIP

    Your brain is your best weapon, without doubt.

    There is no set of rules that will govern every contingency.* Be alert and improvise a solution as best you can.* Be aware that it may not work.* These situations are life-and-death, and there is no room for mistakes.

    SNIP ...
    +1

    IMHO, This is the correct answer. Bring your brain to the fight or it will not be there when you need it. Actually there is no set of rules that will govern ANY contingency, in defense situations. The only rule in a fight for your life is that there are NO rules. A lot of times "conventional wisdom" turns out to be neither.

    Tomahawk also makes a valid point. Defense is about stopping threats. In some cases this may result in or cause the death of an attacker (human or otherwise), but that is a collateral effect of some self defense acts, not the desired outcome.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    If someone is in my home I am not going to fiddle around with anything else other that something that will end his life - fast.
    To protect yourself legally, you should be discussing stopping the threat to you or your family's lives, not ending someone else's life.
    In effect, if you use deadly force to stop a threat, then you are trying to end that person's life. Saying "stop the threat [by using deadly force]" is just another way to say "end his life [to stop the threat]." So, in my eyes, you both are referring to the same thing. I wouldn't fault either way of saying it.

    Openryan did not indicate he would do anything illegal. To my knowledge, planning to do something which is legal is not a crime. Since "ending a life" for the purpose of self-defense is not illegal, I don't see how a DA could make a case from Openryan's wording.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    If someone is in my home I am not going to fiddle around with anything else other that something that will end his life - fast.
    To protect yourself legally, you should be discussing stopping the threat to you or your family's lives, not ending someone else's life.
    In effect, if you use deadly force to stop a threat, then you are trying to end that person's life.* Saying "stop the threat [by using deadly force]" is just another way to say "end his life [to stop the threat]."* So, in my eyes, you both are referring to the same thing.* I wouldn't fault either way of saying it.

    Openryan did not indicate he would do anything illegal.* To my knowledge, planning to do something which is legal is not a crime.* Since "ending a life" for the purpose of self-defense is not illegal, I don't see how a DA could make a case from Openryan's wording.
    There is a huge difference between using using deadly force that results in a death, and using deadly force with the intent to cause a death. Deadly force is not ALWAYS deadly, only potentially so.

    What Tomahawk was pointing out was that Openryan's statement is more of the character of the latter than the former. A prosecutor most certainly could and would make use of that sort of talk.

    see these links for this very kind of use of internet chat -

    used by the defense
    or this
    used by the prosecutor in the same case.

    Alexander even spoke of researching the law on the Internet and concluding he could shoot inspectors for being on his property, a meat supplier who did business with Alexander told jurors.
    I was there, and this element of the prosecutions case was used to prove premeditation. In this case premeditation=Death penalty.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Anyone who wants to come into my home without a warrant, and to do harm, is going to get shot, in the face.

    Premeditation, no, prepared, yes!

    The point is, nobody should have any business entering my property unless I warrant their entrance, or a court of law does.

    If they brought this up in court and it work, I hope they would kill me, I don't want to live in a country like that


  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , New York, USA
    Posts
    122

    Post imported post

    So its okay to come into your home with a warrant and do harm?

    j/k

    openryan wrote:
    Anyone who wants to come into my home without a warrant, and to do harm, is going to get shot, in the face.

    Premeditation, no, prepared, yes!

    The point is, nobody should have any business entering my property unless I warrant their entrance, or a court of law does.

    If they brought this up in court and it work, I hope they would kill me, I don't want to live in a country like that

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    DT4E31 wrote:
    So its okay to come into your home with a warrant and do harm?

    j/k


    openryan wrote:
    Anyone who wants to come into my home without a warrant, and to do harm, is going to get shot, in the face.

    Premeditation, no, prepared, yes!

    The point is, nobody should have any business entering my property unless I warrant their entrance, or a court of law does.

    If they brought this up in court and it work, I hope they would kill me, I don't want to live in a country like that
    If the state says so :P



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    If someone is in my home I am not going to fiddle around with anything else other that something that will end his life - fast.
    To protect yourself legally, you should be discussing stopping the threat to you or your family's lives, not ending someone else's life.
    In effect, if you use deadly force to stop a threat, then you are trying to end that person's life.
    Wrong. While I may be very angry at an attacker, Iwill not set outto kill him. I will use deadly force, if required, to stop the threat. If the attacker should happen to die in the process, that is unfortunate, but since I plan to stop using deadly force as soon as he stops attacking, he stands a pretty good chance of living. In fact, if he runs after seeing that I'm armed, there won't even be a shooting, although this is still a use of deadly force.

    You may think I'm splitting hairs, here, but there's a world of difference between the two in lawyer-land.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •