Protecting Yourself and Others – Page 12

Situations in Shades of Gray

I talk about a lot of bad police decisions but most of those situations are black and white. That is to say a police officer obviously abused his or her power or otherwise initiated violence. Sadly not every situation is black and white, many shades of gray exist. Take for instance the story about a police officer who show a 15 year-old kid brandishing a realistic pellet gun:

The parents of an eighth grader who was fatally shot by police inside his South Texas school are demanding to know why officers took lethal action, but police said the boy was brandishing — and refused to drop — what appeared to be a handgun and that the officers acted correctly.

The weapon turned out to be a pellet gun that closely resembled the real thing, police said late Wednesday, several hours after 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez was repeatedly shot in a hallway at Cummings Middle School in Brownsville. No one else was injured.

A picture of the gun can be found at the link and from a distance I can see how an officer would mistake it for a real handgun. Some may say this is a valid case of using violence while others will claim it wasn’t. Others have also questioned the amount of force used by the officer, which I will address in a bit.

So far the story is mostly he-said-she-said. The officer is claiming the kid was pointing the gun at him. Without any way of knowing the weapon was fake that certainly qualifies as immediate threat to life. When I read about these kinds of situations I try to put myself in the shoes of the shooter. What did the cop see? Did the kid point the pellet gun at the officer? Was anything said during the altercation? In this case I have no answers and desire more data. Unfortunately more data isn’t always available and we may find ourselves in these kinds of situations. This reality must be acknowledge by anybody who carries a gun and should be given, at least, a cursory consideration. Most of self-defense is mental preparation and state of mind.

Now let us return to the amount of force that was used:

“Why was so much excess force used on a minor?” the boy’s father, Jaime Gonzalez Sr., asked The Associated Press outside the family’s home Wednesday night. “Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?”

Let’s consider the use of a firearm. A firearm is a lethal weapon designed to kill, we shouldn’t kid ourselves otherwise. Employing a firearm should only be done when you have decided the situation requires the use of lethal force. Therefore it is safe to say when a firearm is drawn the amount of force necessary to end the situation becomes whatever is necessary.

Any self-defense class and, I’m assuming, police training class will teach you to shoot until the threat has stopped. If the threat stops at the presentation of the firearm you shouldn’t shoot, if it stops after a non-lethal wound you stop, if it stops only after the assailant is dead then that is what you must do. We must also realize that handgun cartridges are anemic and overall poor man stoppers. To overcome this limitation standard procedure is to fire two shots immediately at center mass. If the threat has not ceased after two shots you must take more, possibly even attempting to shoot the attacker in the head. Needless to say the round count is likely to start at two and escalate from there so three shots in this situation shouldn’t be surprising.

In the end the kid may have simply committed suicide by cop. While I’m not willing to pass final judgement in this case I am leaning towards this conclusion unless further data becomes available. Beyond the situation there is something else to take into consideration:

About 20 minutes elapsed between police receiving a call about an armed student and shots being fired, according to police and student accounts. Authorities declined to share what the boy said before he was shot.

Had the kid been in possession of a real weapon and malicious intent he would have had 20 minutes to do whatever he please. Schools, being gun-free zones, don’t allow for lawful self-defense. Teachers and faculty with valid carry permits are not allowed to carry in a elementary or high school so the only solution that really exists for stopping a violence individual is to wait for the police. A lot can happen in 20 minutes and the state prohibits use mere serfs from defending ourselves inside of these gun-free zones. This situation could have been far worse because of government decree.

The Fallacy of State Provided Protection

A recently widowed mother whose husband died of cancer found herself in another tragic situation. When she was at home with her child a thug with a knife decided it would be a jolly good idea to do a little breaking and entering. The mother called 911 but ended up having to defend herself as the phrase, “When seconds count the police are only minutes away.” was demonstrated once again:

Oklahoma news media have the compelling story of a shotgun-toting 18-year-old mother who killed an intruder on New Year’s Eve after a 911 operator told her, “Do what you have to do to protect your baby.”

[…]

The 911 conversation lasted for 21 minutes. Then the door gave in.

21 minutes, that’s how long the call laster and the police had not arrive. This story, along with many like it, demonstrate the fallacy of state provided protection. How horrible is it that the government not only maintains a monopoly on police protection but has also ruled that it has no obligation to actually provide you the promised services.

Let’s look at where police protection in this country currently sits. In almost all cases the state maintains a monopoly on armed protective services and even if a private alternative exists customers are unable to cease paying the government for it’s ill-provided protection service. See those who seek alternative protection and thus no longer desire to utilize the government provided police will be kidnapped by those very officer and tossed into a cage unless they begin paying again.

Even protecting yourself is burdensome if not impossible because of government laws. Many countries and individual states in the United States have strong laws against self-defense. Some states don’t allow individuals to carry firearms on their person, many states don’t have any form of stand your ground of castle doctrine laws on the books, and other states have strong restrictions on who can even own a gun. The lack of stand your ground and castle doctrine laws are perhaps the most egregious because it assumes guilt on behalf of the defender, and in the case of missing castle doctrine that guilt is still assumed in the defender’s own home.

Firearms are hands down the best tools available for person defense but access to them is strictly controlled. In the United States any person charged with a felony, even a non-violent felony, is prohibited from owning firearms. If the mother in this story had been in possession of enough marijuana to be charged with felony possession she likely wouldn’t have had that firearm available to her and she and her child would likely be dead now. Outside of the United States firearm possession is even more strictly controlled with complete prohibition existing in some countries. Were this mother in England she and her child would likely be dead. Thus self-protection has been taken from the state and is only granted to those it deems worthy.

This story only ended happily because the woman lived in a place that “allows” people to defend themselves, own a firearm, and she wasn’t an “undesirable” person. Even though she has paid for police protection and will have to continue paying she has no recourse for the fact a squad car hadn’t arrive after 21 minutes. Were she able to seek a private provider a contractual agreement could have been made requiring protection to arrive within a specified span of time or the mother would no longer be made to continue paying for services.

State provide protection is a fallacy because they don’t actually offer protection. If you call the state protection service they may or may not send somebody to help, it’s a crap shoot.

A Real American Badass

More people should be like this man:

A 77-year-old Minneapolis man was determined to fight off four armed robbers recently. He was so determined that he fended off the criminals with a sledgehammer.

[…]

“I grabbed this sledge but he didn’t know I grabbed it because I acted like I was going into my pocket. I slipped it over I turned it around and I knocked the gun out of his hand,” Krier said.

He said he used his combat training from 1958 to fend off the attackers. Krier said the sledge hammer hit the robber in the hand.

“The gun went in the alley and the guy hollered,” said Krier.

Krier then chased the men.

“Then I grabbed another sledge and I went out the door and they ran out the alley,” Krier said.

One 77 year-old man fending off four men with a sledge hammer is nothing but pure badass. I’m proud of the fact that men like this live in my state.

Fear Doesn’t Motivate My Decision to Carry a Gun

It never fails, when I talk about carrying a firearm somebody always chimes in and says something along the lines of, “I can’t imagine living my life in constant fear like you do!” There is a misconception among many who don’t carry, which is the belief those of us who carry do so out of fear.

I carry a gun for the same reason I keep a jump pack in my truck, wear a seatbelt, carry a Swiss Army Knife, have a stockpile of food, have extra batteries for my equipment, and backup data on my system regularly: I like being prepared. Thankfully I live in an area where violent crime is low but, like an auto accident, a violent crime can happen anywhere so it’s good to have a means of self-defense available. My firearm is another tool in my toolbox that gives me a better chance of a satisfactory result in a specific scenario.

When I first obtained my carry permit I didn’t do so because I was living in a state of fear, I did it because I believe having a firearm would enhance my capabilities in specific situations. While I was never in the Boy Scouts I do live by the mantra of always being prepared. My daily footwear are waterproof boots because boots in general have far more utility than shoes and I absolutely hate wet feet. Granted as a person who works in an office all day it’s unlikely I’ll be in a situation where waterproof boots are useful but there is no detriment if I wear boots and there are advantages so that’s what I do. Having four-wheel drive on my truck isn’t a feature I need every day but when a really bad snowstorm hits it’s nice to know I can get to where I need to go.

For most of us carrying a firearm means nothing more than having the right tool for the right job on hand.

Sheriff Chuck Wright Seems Like a Smart Man

Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright seems like a pretty levelheaded man and honestly I wish more police officers adopted his way of thinking. Instead of being a self-righteous authoritarian who believes only himself and his selected employees are competent enough to protect the populace Sheriff Write is discussing self-defense with those who don’t carry badges:

Hundreds of people packed a meeting room Monday night to listen to Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright, teachers and officials discuss protection tips, including everything from cutting back bushes around homes to carrying guns.

When Brenda Thornton walked up to a meeting room at the Spartanburg County government office building Monday night, she had to stand outside of the door.

“When I got in here, we couldn’t get in,” she said.

She and others stood outside, but they listened closely to tips about protecting themselves.

“I have always really wanted to have a gun in my car because I travel a lot by myself,” she said.

And when Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright walked in, the crowd gave him a standing ovation.

“I still believe women get your CWP, if that’s what you choose to do, but train yourselves with it,” Wright said.

I’m giving him points not just for recommending people get carry permits but also emphasizing the necessity to train with a the firearm you plan to carry. While carrying a firearm is smart it won’t serve much use if you don’t know how to properly utilize the weapon. Propert utilization requires a great deal of training so that all operations with the firearm are muscle memory. Being in a high-stress situation where your life is on the line is not the time to wonder how to reload the firearm or disengage the manual safety.

More police officers need to follow Sheriff Wright’s lead and properly education people on self-defense. Too many officers seem to believe only trained cops have the ability to defend a life and that attitude needs to be extinguished.

Another Application for Shotguns

I feel bad for business owners near Zuccotti Park as there seems to be an increase in the number of harassement incidents initiated by occupiers. While I gave the occupiers the benefit of the doubt at first I’m starting to like less and less of what I hear coming out of New York and this incident makes me glad the Minnesota occupiers have remained peaceful and civil:

A business owner near the Occupy Wall Street encampment claims she has been repeatedly harassed and threatened with bodily harm by protesters after she and her employees refused to give in to their outlandish demands.

“I’ve been told, ‘Watch your back!’ 10 times,” Stacey Tzortzatos, owner of Panini & Co. Breads, located across from Zuccotti Park, told The Post yesterday.

She and her employees are terrified by the constant threats, which she said began after she demanded the protesters stop using her shop’s restroom as a place to bathe every day.

The final straw came about two weeks ago, when the demonstrators broke a bathroom sink, flooding the shop, and clogged the toilet — setting her back $3,000 in damages.

[…]

And on Friday, she said, a crazed squatter burst into the shop and demanded that workers fill a 10-gallon container of water.

When they refused, “he banged it on the ground and started yelling” and threatened the staff, she said.

“He said he was entitled to have it for free.”

As I’ve said before rioters are severely allergic to shotgun pellets. Although I realize getting a shotgun in New York is likely difficult I would urge Ms. Tzortzatos to arm herself. She will be amazed how quickly a violent thugs turns into a fleeing coward at the sight of a shotgun. And if the sight of the shotgun isn’t enough to scare them away the bark will certainly take care of the violent offender before the offender has a chance to harm or kill store employees or patrons.

Rioters are Severely Allergic to Shotgun Pellets

Don’t you hate it when roving marauders try to bust up your property and steal your stuff? Luckily there is a way to prevent this from happening by exploiting a well known rioter allergy, shotgun pellets:

“We had people who attempted to break into our building,” the landmark Rotunda Building on Frank Ogawa Plaza outside City Hall, Tagami said Thursday. He grabbed a shotgun that he usually keeps at home, went down to the ground floor and “discouraged them,” he said.

“I was standing there and they saw me there, and I lifted it – I didn’t point it – I just held it in my hands,” Tagami said. “And I just racked it, and they ran.”

Rioters are so severely allergic to shotgun pellets just the sight of a shotgun will often send them running in fear. Trying to be ballsy the rioters did do some graffiti work on the outside of the building:

Although they didn’t get inside the building – Tagami, 46, oversaw its $50 million renovation and has an office there – vandals did scrawl graffiti on the outside walls during the post-midnight riot that broke out after Occupy Oakland’s daylong general strike.

I’m sure this could have been solved by placing a few people with shotguns around the outside of the build though.

While I make light of the situation the story does bring up a example of why having a means of self-defense is a good thing. Although I don’t advocate the possession of firearms as a mere deterrent the fact of the matter is an assailant is less likely to attack you or yours if they know you’re in possession of a firearm. As the economy continues to crumble the rate of crime, both violent and property, is likely to increase. Knowing this I think it’s a good idea to obtain a means of self-defense less things turn to total shit in your area and you remain completely unarmed as rioters decide your home or business is a good target for looting.

Be Realistic in Equipment Selection

While I love most aspects about the gun community, the handful of people advocating the utterly ridiculous really annoys me. On this week’s episode of Chris Rants About Random Members of the Gun Community we’re going to talk those who say weapons lights and laser sights are bad news when it comes to tactics. Over at Gun Nuts Media Caleb has a good post covering how absurd some people are when it comes to illumination and target verification. Caleb points to the following quote by a member of the gun community:

Given the warning of the light, and knowing the gun’s aiming point, this is a perfect setup for an armed intruder to edge up to the wall in a crouch, then reach around and shoot upwards. If t’were I doing the intruding, I would aim a little low, in case the gentleperson upstairs was also crouching. Even if not, a pelvic or thigh hit would ruin the defender’s day, and probably give me the chance for a few more shots.

Far better for the defender to wait around the edge of the stairwell, out of sight, listening for footsteps. [I’ve never run into a set of wooden stairs that didn’t creak somewhat.] Flashlight OFF, laser on, but covered by support hand until last moment. Even without a well-aligned laser pointer, a quick snap-shot or two at point-blank range would resolve the issue quite favorably. An added precaution would be for the defender to be crouched as low as possible [prone would reduce maneuverability excessively].

I completely agree on Caleb’s take of this quote:

I see comments like this all the time, and they drive me up the freakin’ wall every time I see them. I don’t know about you, but my position is going to be pretty effectively given away by me screaming at the 911 operator that someone’s in my house and that they need to get cops here most ricky-tick before I have to shoot this guy.

Now comes the harsh reality, while thinking up random tactical scenarios is fun it’s not at all practical. I enjoy sitting down with friends, drinking a few beers, and coming up with outrageous self-defense scenarios. Yet I know better than to take those alcohol induced scenarios and applying them to real life.

Let’s do some advantage to disadvantage weighing. Being able to see your target and verify it’s a bad guy is a great advantage. Giving away your position by emitting light that allows you to see and verify your target holds litte disadvantage. You likely won’t be dealing with Spetsnaz invading your home and if you are then you’re way in over your head and likely died before realizing anybody broke into your home.

Your aggressor is also going to be in the dark so the light that telegraphs your location and harms your night vision is also going to blind that fucker. Here’s the thing though, as his eyes will be adjusted to total darkness while yours are adjusted to the light he’ll be totally blind for a bit while you can see him perfectly. Having a blind opponent greatly increases your odds of winning a fight, just saying.

If you’re that concerned about using a weapons light because you feel it will give away your position while your loud footsteps and yelling as you bang into things while stumbling around a dark house won’t then you’re an idiot.

The Dog I Want

I’ll admit it, between cats and dogs I genuinely prefer cats. Cats are mostly self-sufficient and don’t require the constant attention that dogs do. Give a cat some food, a clean place to shit, and some attention when it wants it and it’ll be happy.

With all of that said if I were to get a pet it would be a dog because when you want quality companionship that will defend you and yours a cat isn’t going to cut it:

Nine-year-old Buster fought so hard to protect his home that he shattered several teeth as he chomped on his attacker’s hunting knife. He also suffered gashes to his throat, shoulder and jowls.

[…]

A thief (or thieves) broke in by smashing two windows of the house on the 1800 block of E. Maryland Avenue. Cash, computers, a hunting bow, three rifles and Wagaman’s corrections uniforms were stolen. The invader turned Wagaman’s own 6-inch hunting knife on Buster, then left the bloody weapon on the kitchen table.

While the dog wasn’t successful in stopping the attackers he gave them a Hell of a fight but the sounds of it. The best part about this story though is that the dog lived:

The dog spent Thursday night at the University of Minnesota veterinary hospital and spent the weekend at home, where Wagaman fed him soft food, kept him warm and medicated with painkillers.

Buster’s Monday surgery was to repair his face wounds and to extract broken teeth.

The dog’s care exceeded $3,000 — before the latest surgery. “That’s a lot of money, but I don’t care. He’s a hero,” Wagaman said.

Employees in the St. Paul emergency communications center, who heard the initial emergency call, have already raised $500 to help. A fund has been set up for Buster’s care in his name at any Wells Fargo branch. The “Buster Fund” is account No. 642-89-22-071.

If I had a dog that fought that hard to defend my home you can bet I’d have little trouble spending $3,000.00 to return it to health. Stories like this are why I want to own a dog some day. While they’re a decent amount of work and expensive they’re still called man’s best friend for a reason.

Perhaps It’s Time to Up My Capacity

It seems the media’s version of flash mobs are becoming more common. A Pedal Pub in Minneapolis was attacked by at least 25 people:

A flash mob of 25 to 30 youths on Saturday night attacked the Pedal Pub, a four-wheeled bicycle and bar powered by up to a dozen people, as it rolled down Nicollet Mall near S. 6th Street.

None of the 12 people riding the Pedal Pub was injured, but the passengers were shaken by the sudden attack, said Scott Ranney, who had rented it with friends.

The kids jumped on the Pub, shook it and grabbed at purses and belongings, Ranney said. A BlackBerry was the only thing stolen, and the attack ended just as suddenly as it began, with the kids running away.

“They could have done anything they wanted,” Ranney said.

In this case the victims were lucky, the attackers stopped without hurting anybody. The outcome could have been much different had the attackers decided they wanted to bring physical harm to those on the Pedal Pub. The last line in the quote is very accurate, the attacks could have done anything they wanted considering how outmatched the riders on the Pedal Pub were.

While I do not advocate combining alcohol and firearms in any form, the drivers of the Pedal Pub is required to remain sober so if I were in that position I would certainly be carrying. Hell with the increase in these so-called flash mobs I’m starting to think my subcompact .45’s 10+1 rounds may be a liability. Even though I always have a spare magazine on me, which gives me an additional 10 rounds, it requires time to grab the spare magazine from my pocket and reload the firearm. I’m starting to think it’s not unwise to have a gun in .40 or 9mm just for the additional capacity. After all good self-defense ammunition exists for all three calibers which makes them very effective relative to one another.