Just as it is prudent to wear your seat belt while driving, it makes sense to know how best to respond to violence. In fact, it is overwhelmingly likely that some of you will become the targets of violence in the future. The purpose of this essay is to help you prepare for it.

A very good essay about self-defense, touching on 3 key principles of how to stay alive and out of trouble. (h/t Low Tech Combat)

Go read the article. On the whole I agree with it, but I do have some comments.

Principle #1: Avoid dangerous people and dangerous places.

This is true. The more you do to avoid trouble in the first place, the better. Some gun-folk may have heard it as “don’t go anywhere with a gun that you wouldn’t go without a gun”. Training courses such as Insights Training Center’s Street and Vehicle Tactics, and building upon that, SouthNarc’s Managing Unknown Contacts (MUC) can be quite useful in this realm.

Just remember Insight’s ABC’s: Always Be Cool.

Principle #2: Do not defend your property.

When I first read this, my gut feeling was to disagree. There can be very valid and just reasons for defense of property. However, when you read his elaboration on the principle, he’s basically alluding to the “beer and tv maxim“. I do agree with that and believe it a worthwhile guiding principle.

Principle #3: Respond immediately and escape.

I’ll agree here. When it comes, you must respond swiftly. Get away? Yes. It’s a good way to ensure you can live another day. We’re not out to have some sort of just fight, we’re not crime-fighters, we’re merely trying to defend our lives and keep on living. Escape enables that end.

And yes:

If someone puts a gun to your head and demands your purse or wallet, hand it over immediately and run. Don’t worry about being shot in the back: If your attacker is going to shoot you for running, he was going to shoot you if you stayed in place, and at point-blank range. By running, you make yourself harder to kill.

By running, you do make yourself harder to kill. For a lot of gun people, think about it like the Tueller Drill in reverse. If someone can close the gap that quickly, someone can also increase the gap that quickly. That means it doesn’t take you all that long to get out of range. I recall in a class with Tom Givens that he said something to the effect of about 8 yards (or maybe 10 yards?) or so, most people can’t hit worth a darn after that distance. So if someone can close a 7 yard gap in 1.5 seconds, you can make a 7 yard gap in 1.5 seconds… not much time at all to put yourself at a distance that most people can’t hit you at… and since you’re moving, you’ll be an even more difficult target. So indeed, there’s something to Nike-Fu as a self-defense tactic.

But is it always that easy? Can you always “just escape”?

What if your attacker has a knife to your child’s throat and tells you that everything is going to be okay as long as you cooperate by lying face down on the floor? Don’t do it. It would be better to flee the house—because as soon as you leave, he will know that the clock is ticking: Within moments, you will be at a neighbor’s home summoning help. If this intruder is going to murder your child before fleeing himself, he was going to murder your child anyway—either before or after he killed you. And he was going to take his time doing it. Granted, it is almost impossible to imagine leaving one’s child in such a circumstance—but if you can’t leave, you must grab a weapon and press your own attack. Complying in the hope that a sociopath will keep his promise to you is always the wrong move.

I admit, I haven’t considered that option in that scenario. And I’m not sure I can. I cannot see myself fleeing from my children in their most dire moment of need. I admit, I don’t believe compliance with a nutjob is going to get me anywhere, but I’m also just not sure that escaping to call for help is going to accomplish good things. Or at least, it seems that either way things could go good or things could go ugly… and I guess I’d rather take my chances sticking around. If I leave my child, not only the feeling that gives them of Dad leaving them (and while my kids might know how to fight, they’re still children and my leaving could easily destroy their morale), but now I don’t know where they are and what’s going on… is child going to be taken to crime scene #2?

A perfect example that just happened down in Houston.

It all started when Goodie’s 14-year-old daughter, Moriah, was headed to school around 6:30 a.m. Investigators said she’d just locked up her home and was walking down the sidewalk when she was approached by two men.

[…]

“The gentlemen that had her around the neck said he was going to kill her if [the father] did not back away. [The suspect] started dragging the young girl into the street. There was some separation, and at that point the daddy was able to fire one shot at the suspect,” Stauber said.

Read the full article. Does YOU escaping really sound like a viable option in that circumstance? Or does pressing the attack to enable your child to escape seem like the better option?

Still, to have the option put into my head? I’m not unhappy it happened. I never considered it before, but I’m sure I’ll contemplate it now to determine pros, cons, appropriate situations, under what circumstances it might actually be the best option. I’m not going to outright poo-poo it, but I will admit it may be difficult for me to overcome and accept it as a possible option.

Regardless, the article is overall a good one. The core is solid, and even if you don’t agree with it, I think what the article presents is well-worth considering… if for nothing else, the expansion and presentation of new ideas helps you find better solutions: either the new one is better, or you add more support to your existing solutions.