It’s some amazing hog hunting with a bolt action rifle.
And after you finish watching and rewatching his skill with that rifle, think about what he talks about.
He talks about gun fit. He talks about how important it is for the gun to fit you if you want to shoot fast and shoot well.
Notice, no talk of caliber?
Yes I know it’s about rifles, but rifles, shotguns, handgun, it applies to any of them. Hardware matters. If you have bad hardware, you’re just not going to shoot as well can you could with good hardware. There is a limit of course ; get a Sauer rifle and you won’t shoot as well as this guy, but it’s evident the Sauer rifle allows him to shoot better than a low-quality rifle or a rifle not set up for him. It is primarily about the skill of the person, but skill can be hampered or enhanced with the right tools.
Gun fit matters more than the other things The Internet tells you is important.
Well, that depends on who “you” is, but for the general public, yes in fact everything you know about violence is wrong. It wasn’t until some years ago that I became more educated on the topic.
The article works to bust the four misconceptions presented above. Why? Because education and truth are better than ignorance, especially if you’re going to discuss — and make policy — relative to the issue.
Be honest [with yourself] in admitting that they [people who deal with violence daily, police officers, soldiers, EMTs, security officers, bouncers, etc.] have relevant experience with a subject that is primarily academical for you. So it would behoove you to consider their responses as more accurate than your uninformed opinions.
There is nothing wrong with that, by the way. It’s a good thing that you haven’t been exposed to violence all that much. I am not promoting people go out and be violent to learn what it is really all about. What I am promoting is that the large majority of modern society has a flawed understanding of the topic. Personally, I blame politicians and Hollywood for creating a false image of it, but that’s another discussion.
What I am also not promoting is a “kill or be killed” attitude. On the contrary, the most practical and useful self-defense tips have nothing to do with punching the other guy’s lights out. But before you can form an opinion on violence and how to handle it, you need to understand the problem first. Doing so means confronting your own biases and views on this subject with what it is actually like in real life.
Indeed. You get all upset when people with a demonstrative ignorance of science attempt to explain or deny global warming. So can you understand how we feel when you talk about “how to stop (gun) violence” when you have a demonstrative ignorance about violence?
Thank you for the kind and honest words. You did well in class, and it was evident you learned a lot. Looking forward to seeing you in future classes, with one of them new-fangled plastic guns. 😉
First, Kee Whan Ha was prepared. He had his guns before the riots started. He wasn’t paranoid, he was prepared. And rightfully so. No one expected riots to ever break out in L.A., but they did. And his preparation paid off.
Second, you need to let go of the illusion that we’re some highly civilized society. The veneer of civilization is thin and fragile. It doesn’t take much for our primitive monkey brains to kick in, and for things to go south.
Look at the L.A. riots. Look at Hurricane Katrina. Heck, watch various cities after a sports team wins or loses. Heck, Axl Rose caused numerous riots because of his behavior at concerts.
Society breaks down pretty quickly. We get upset, we get scared, we panic, we feed off the energy of others, and shit gets ugly really fast.
I know you like to comment on how everything around you is so peaceful. And true, right now and in your past it may have been. Congratulations on making good and fortunate choices throughout life. Not everyone is as fortunate as you. And remember that past performance doesn’t guarantee future results: your luck may run out.
It’s footage from the 1992 L.A. Riots (after the Rodney King verdict). It’s about the Korean shopkeepers arming themselves, standing on the roofs of their stores, defending them from the rioters and looters.
While searching for that footage, an NPR interview with Kee Whan Ha came up. He’s the store owner that organized and motivated the Koreatown shopkeepers to undertake their defensive action.
Why would he do such a thing? I mean, why didn’t he just give the looters what they wanted (because “just give them what they want” is the refrain we’re supposed to abide by):
MARTIN: I understand that, as the disturbance was beginning, you heard hosts on Radio Korea – which is L.A.’s major Korean-American radio station – tell people to leave their businesses and go home and pray. And you told one of our producers that that made you upset. Could you talk a little bit about that?
HA: Yeah. I was so upset. So I know the owner of that Radio Korea, so I brought my handgun and I put it on the table. I told him that we established Koreatown. It’s been more than 20 years (unintelligible) riot, even to be able – insurance and everything, but I want to protect my business, as well as all other Koreatown business.
He was one of the founders of Koreatown. He wasn’t going to see his life’s work, what defines him, be put to ruin.
Oh it’s just property, oh it’s just stuff. That’s true to you, but not to him. It was more than his castle, and it was something that, to him, was well-worth defending. Are you telling me he’s wrong? he’s unjustified in trying to preserve his legacy? his positive contribution to society? That the world would be better off if he gave in to the criminals, the leeches, the destructive forces?
So why didn’t he just call the police? Because the police are supposed to defend and protect us, right?
HA: From Wednesday, I don’t see any police patrol car whatsoever. That’s a wide-open area, so it is like Wild West in old days, like there’s nothing there. We are the only one left, so we have to do our own (unintelligible).
[…]
HA: …I was standing a few feet away, so I see that [our security guard’s] body has fallen down on the ground, but I was so scared. I – we tried to call the fire department. Please help us. But nobody listen. Then maybe after five or six hours in the evening – it start around the afternoon, about 1:00 or 2:00 p.m. But actual – the fire truck coming about 7:00 o’clock, late evening. So five hours, of course, is sitting between us and them.
Five hours with no response. No one could come to save them.
Can you imagine the fear, the stress, tha anxiety felt during that time? One hour goes by and still nothing. Every minute watching the chaos unfolding, wondering when someone will come to save you. How scared would you be if you were in his shoes?
But at least they had guns.
But at least they were able to do something for themselves. To pluck up their courage and stand firm. They weren’t helpless victims.
How would you have fared that day? Would you have been a helpless victim?
I would have been.
In 1992 I was in undergrad. I never was anti-gun, but I sure didn’t understand it. I recall questioning my pro-gun friends as to why anyone needed an automatic rifle to hunt Bambi. Looking back, I can see the many facets of my ignorance.
MARTIN: Did you have to fire your weapon?
HA: Yes. Actually, we are not shooting people. We are shooting the – in the air, so make afraid that these people coming to us. You’re not actually targeting people, so…
MARTIN: Sure. You were trying to create a – sort of a protective barrier, and you did succeed in saving your store.
HA: Yes.
So without guns, Kee Whan Ha and the other families of Koreatown would have lost everything. Not just their stores, but their legacy and contribution towards a better society.
Could you look Kee Whan Ha in the eye and tell him you want to deny him his business? his contribution? his legacy? The banning of effective tools of self-defense is precisely looking into the eyes of people like Kee Whan Ha and saying you will deny him.
I got this from Chuck Rives. From the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report for 2012, we have the Expanded Homicide Data Table 15 – Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Private Citizen (the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.) 2008-2012. Link here but the link is kinda weird so hopefully it works for you (it ends in .xls, but opens a web page…). Anyways, here’s a screenshot:
So basically, this is what good people used to defend themselves.
Now, you have to be very specific in taking what this table tells us. There are a lot of unanswered questions, and a lot of deeper things that’d be interesting to know. For example, it’s only about the killing of a felon during the commission of a felony. What about the felons that didn’t die during the commission of a felony? That might provide a greater picture about what good people use to defend themselves in general. What was the nature of the crime? was it a drug deal that went bad (because I reckon some of those could wind up in this table, and then is that really a good statistic?)? was it muggings? how about rape? home invasion vs. “on the street”? There’s a lot of things that would be great to know. Alas, we can only take this table for what it’s worth.
You can look at the politics. Handguns are a primary tool in self-defense. Ban handguns, deny people (men, women, straight, gay, white, black, Christian, Jew, Muslim, whatever minority group you favor) the right and ability to keep themselves safe from harm.
I like to look at the practical.
One possible conclusion to draw from this is if you’re going to be attacked, a handgun is the more likely tool you’d use to defend yourself. Long guns (rifles, shotguns) tend to be a tool of the home-front; private citizens generally will not have them as they walk down the street. Long guns aren’t exclusive to the home; recall the Korean shopkeepers during the LA Riots in 1992 standing on the roofs of their buildings with long guns. But you get the point – long guns cannot be as ubiquitous as a handgun.
I know we prefer to have long guns for home and office defense. Why? Because we can, and they are a more effective tool. But if the one thing you can have all the time is your hand gun, doesn’t it make sense to be proficient with it? You carry it on your person all day. It’s in your bedside safe at night. It’s the one thing that’s always most accessible to you. If you have limited training and practice time, should you divide it amongst various tools? or focus on the one that has the most universal applicability?
Just having a gun isn’t enough. Just carrying it every day isn’t enough. To have passed some state-mandated test isn’t enough. There are issues of minimum competency. Is a handgun good enough for home defense? If it’s the tool you’re most proficient with, sure. It’s better to use a tool you know well and have confidence in using.
The inventor of the AR-15 was Satan, though his patent has since expired.
Scientists have confirmed the deadly effects of an AR-15 by giving it to a chimpanzee who then murdered them.
Scientists agree that each year the AR-15 will grow more deadly until it kills everyone in the entire world.
Some believe that Hitler was in fact an AR-15 in a rubber mask.
In the Garden of Eden, God gave Adam and Eve access to every firearm out there except for the AR-15 which he told them not to touch because it was too evil. But then the NRA, in the guise of a serpent, told Eve that the AR-15 is really fun to shoot. So then Eve took the AR-15 and started shooting all the animals in the garden because she is one awesome chick.
The part that makes the AR-15 so extra deadly is the handle on top. The AR-15 would be used in less murders if it were more inconvenient to carry.
It was an AR-15 that told Miley Cyrus to dance like that.
Bullets that are normally harmless will kill instantly when fired out of the AR-15.
The reason AR-15s have that prominent handle on them is because the most requested feature for an assault rifle was to be able to carry it like a Hello Kitty lunch box.
If you find yourself surrounded by AR-15’s, know that they will fire automatically if they sense fear.
The AR-15 is easily concealable and can fit inside a matchbox.
The AR-15 is the leading cause of global warming from how its bullets shoot holes in the ozone.
A very small percentage of gun deaths are attributed to the AR-15 because it is very good at disguising itself as other guns to frame them.
What are the differences between an M16 and an AR-15? Scientists agree that it is something.
The AR-15 can be rendered harmless by giving it only a 10 round magazine as people always miss with the first ten rounds and an AR-15 takes an hour and a half to reload.
The AR-15 can shoot through schools.
In a battle between Aquaman and an AR-15, Aquaman would break down and buy it so people might think he’s more manly.
There were no shooting deaths until the invention of an AR-15. No one even considered using a gun to shoot another human being until someone saw an AR-15 and said, “I bet I could use this to kill a lot of people.”
There was an assault musket similar to the AR-15 used by the world’s most evil pirates, but it was pronounced “Arrr-15.”
The Assault Weapon ban was needed because it is well known that an AR-15 with both a pistol grip and a flash suppressor would be unstoppable by any modern military.
In Europe there is no such thing as an AR-15 and thus also no such thing as murders. Instead of being violent, people there just drink wine and smoke cigarettes all day.
If you are shot by an AR-15, you become one and kill others.
The AR-15 is responsible for 95% of all deaths each year. The rest of the deaths are from obesity and drone strikes.
I saw that on Claude Werner’s Facebook page. I have no idea who the original author is (I’ve seen it crop up in other places, no attributions).
I’m referring to the emotional/psychological taxes. Most people never consider violence’s deeper impact. The noxious effects that create PTSD, the memories that stain our mind’s-eye and silently agitate our nervous system.
When bad shit happens close-up, everything can change.
So what would you pay to avoid some of this? What would you pay to feel safer?
His answer?
Pay attention.
Some days ago, a man on a San Francisco Muni train pulled out a gun and flashed it around. A lot. There was nothing covert, hidden, or non-obvious about what he was doing – he was quite obvious and blatant. However, everyone around him was oblivious, noses buried in their phones and tablets. No one saw what was going on until the guy shot someone. Apparently it was a random encounter, thus anyone on that train could have been the victim, and they never would have known… they never would have had a chance to do anything.
Now, everyone is quick to blame mobile devices. We have to remember that books and newspapers and Walkman’s existed long ago, and people found themselves just as engrossed and oblivious with those. However, I cannot deny that we’ve changed and find ourselves with our noses buried on the glass screen a lot more these days. In fact, people tend to consider that device of primary importance, more so than driving or walking. I admit, I’ve watched people walking around with their eyes on their phone and not on where they were going, and I’ve been tempted to step in front of them or simply insert my hand between their eyes and their phone. It’d be to make a point that perhaps they should pay more attention to the world around them, alas, I’d just be seen as an asshole and no lesson would be learned. *sigh*
Mr. Blauer talks about the 3 D’s:
1) DETECT (to avoid)
2) DEFUSE (to de-escalate)
3) DEFEND (to protect).
Two-thirds of your personal safety takes place before you even step on the “X” (The “X” being symbolic for the time & place of an ambush).
The Three D’s is the basis of your ‘ Personal Defense OS’.
Two-thirds of confrontation management relies on awareness, mental toughness and fear management strategies before any contact is made. Avoiding danger should be the primary directive.
Yes, this is where “force-on-force” training pays off. The thought of “FoF” scares a lot of people because it makes it sound like it’s going to be a UFC battle. Yes, there’s FoF classes (like SouthNarc’s ECQC) that are about going to some physical extremes. But a lot of FoF training is just scenarios, role playing, with little physicality (and a lot of people finding their inner thespian). What it does give you is a lot of understanding of how Detect and Defuse play a big role in your own personal safety. If the only training you’ve had is to “draw your gun” or “palm strike to the nose”, you only know how to do #3, and that’s not always going to be the right answer.
This sort of training helps you make a mental shift. It sinks in a lot of reality, and should enable you to give yourself permission to listen to yourself more. Blauer continues:
This strategically brings us into the next step in enhancing your personal safety: decide right now to respect and embrace your body’s survival signals. If an alarm goes off, respond to it. Got a bad feeling? Address it. Something nagging at you? Stop and look into it. Don’t ignore these signals. Don’t rationalize and mentally correct them. Don’t dismiss them without assessing them. Your body is built for survival and one of its hard-wired systems is designed to alert you to danger.
I know what some of you are thinking, “What if I mistake a feeling, body language, a gesture or movement and react to it.” And? What’s the downside? No one [important in your life] is going to be upset with you for facing fear. Don’t be shy or embarrassed about this. Accept that the human body will generally err on the side of survival. And so should you. There is no downside to being safe or safer. But there is a massive down side to ignoring these survival signals.
And don’t let peer pressure; socialization, fear of fear or other distractions mess with your survival instincts. We are physiological survival organisms, designed to adapt & survive. (FYI, in my courses I’ve re-named us #humanweapons, because that’s the mindset you need when the shit hits the fan, right? I’d rather remind myself “I’m a human-weapon”, and charge forward than scream, “I’m a Survival organism!” self-talk is key. Also, I can use the # on Twitter).
So make a contract with yourself right now that the moment your instincts & intuition raise an alarm that you will take steps to move to safety as soon as possible. Got a bad feeling? Address it now. Get off the “X” ASAP. Start moving when time and space are allies and options.
What’s the cost of learning the most the most important and practical part of self-defense? Zip. Just pay attention. Getting off the “X” is FREE.
The world of carry options, of holsters and such, is geared heavily towards men. I don’t think the bias is intentional, I think it’s a combination of a few factors.
First, men and women are, thankfully, built differently. Generally speaking, the hip area of women tends to have more curves than men. Putting an inside-the-waistband holster on a curvy woman is going to direct the grip of the gun right into her side, which won’t be comfortable nor accessible. Plus, that makes the muzzle jut out, and that’s not very flattering nor practical. So you try to work with something like a “drop and offset” holster, and while that works, it does not conceal very well.
Second, women, thankfully, have different fashion sense than men. They do want things to work with their clothing, with their sense of fashion and style. I’ve spoken with numerous women that like their clothing to flatter their figure, thus wearing loose baggy clothing to conceal stuff really doesn’t jive with their goals. And of course, wearing their figure-flattering clothing isn’t good for concealment either.
Consequently, many women turn to off-body carry.
Alas, the options there aren’t great. Like Galco’s purses? Maybe they are functional, but they are ugly. Coronado Leather seems to have improved their offerings since the last time I checked.
Thankfully, with the rapid growth of women getting concealed handgun licenses, so to has the market grown for carry options.
There’s a wide variety of what’s offered, in terms of both form and function.
But what prompted me to write this wasn’t any purse or handbag. It was something else entirely.
See, while the purse is alright, the disadvantage (amongst others) is drawing it from the purse. When I became certified to teach the NRA Personal Protection Outside the Home course, I had to work a good portion of the class drawing from a purse. Heck, I carry a Maxpedition Jumbo Versipack quite regularly, and it’s effectively a purse/shoulder bag. It’s not really an ideal way to carry and draw. But, better than nothing.
Nothing leads me to believe these are purpose-made for concealed carry. I haven’t seen any in person, only going off what I see on the above web pages and Niki’s review. But it does seem like they can be easily adapted for that purpose, perhaps with an after-market holster added to ensure proper positioning of the gun so it doesn’t shift around and is always where you want it. Then, just practice a lot. If it’s how you’re going to carry, it’s how you should practice. And drawing from a holster like this is certainly something you can do in dry practice at home.
This? It’s just an OWB belt holster. But it’s also drop-and-offset, and far better suited to a woman’s body shape. And maybe your fashion sense (or maybe not, they’ve certainly got a particular style). Me? I also like options like this because hooking everything on your belt, leaving hands free, it’s always more functional just going around in a day. I wore a fanny pack for many many years, and it’s quite handy to have free-hands yet still have close control and retention over your belongings.
I really dig these Warrior Creek packs. It’s quite evident that there’s a demand, and it’s awesome to see such creative answers to these problems.
Stuff From Hsoi 