self defense

If you live in Austin, here’s where your car will get broken into

/ hsoi

Our friends at krimelabb were featured on local KEYE-TV about the most likely places your car will be broken into.

Let’s get to the good stuff:

So where are the hot spots?

According to police reports from the past year, coming in at number three is the UT campus. The sheer number of faculty, staff and students who drive to the university, make it a prime target.

Coming in at number two is anywhere along the I-35 corridor. “The criminal wants to make a quick getaway. They don’t go deep into a neighborhood where they’re passing over speed bumps and stop signs,” added Darby.

And the number one spot you’re most likely to have your vehicle broken into is Burton Drive in East Austin. The area has the most apartment complexes on any street in all of Central Texas. Residents in the neighborhood are get hit all the time.

So it’s about places with lots of cars and also lots of people. The article reports most break-ins happen between 10 PM and midnight — when we’re still awake, but perhaps as many people around. And yes, under cover of darkness. Seems Sunday’s are the most popular day too.

But what causes the cars to get broken into?

“Some people don’t lock their cars,” said Austin police detective Damon Dunn.

[…]

“Mainly your electronic items because that’s what the crooks are looking for,” added detective Dunn.

I have a friend that used to work in the Maine legal system. He never locked his car doors. His take? Leave nothing in your car. Your car should be nothing but your car. Thus, there’s nothing inside for them to steal. If they do want to break in to look, having the doors unlocked means they (hopefully) won’t smash your windows — just open the door, see there’s nothing, close it and leave. If they want your car itself, he says there’s almost nothing you can do as they will take it. So to lock or not to lock isn’t so much the issue, as it is leaving things in your car that the thieves want.

I see it frequently. People at the gas station leaving their car doors open, iPod’s and phones left in the car. Expensive stereos. Then all manner of stuff in the car too: your books, gym bags, other junk. If it’s something someone else could use directly or sell, it gives them reason to try to take it.

Just because you don’t live in one of the hotspots doesn’t mean you won’t be victim. My own neighborhood has been hit, and I’m sure if you look through enough crime reports, you’ll see yours has been too. Take some time and look at the data krimelabb has compiled; you might be surprised, but more importantly, you’ll be informed.

Pushing – walking a fine line

/ hsoi

In a prior article, I referenced an article written by Kathy Jackson. Kathy discusses her role as a self-defense instructor, and the gravity of that role. And while she might strive to make a fun class and work to see her students enjoy her teaching, she understands there’s something more she must do:

In order to fulfill my most important responsibility to my students, I have to risk pushing them beyond their comfort levels. And I have to do it in a way that will cause them to work harder rather than to shut down. If I’m not willing to take that risk for the sake of my students’ lives, I have no right to call myself a self-defense instructor.

We do this in classes at KR Training, varying the level of “push” depending upon the class. In a class like Basic Pistol 1, for some of the students they are pushing their comfort levels merely by attending class and picking up a gun for the first time, so we instructors don’t need to add push and pressure (just comfort and reassurance). In a class like Defensive Pistol Skills 1, we start to relay the gravity of carrying a gun and what self-defense actually involves, so we have students shoot on a timer and yes there’s some yelling by the instructors to raise the pressure levels (because someone trying to kill you is going to be a pressure-filled event!). Then you get to force-on-force classes, and those have a range of discomfort as well.

I think that’s why some people avoid training, or at least, particular types of training.

I know I’m victim of it. I’m human too. I like comfort. I like known. I don’t like getting my ass kicked, I don’t like the physical pain, I don’t like the ego bruising.

But we don’t get better unless we push ourselves. Heck, the only reason I can squat 300# now is because I pushed myself over my fears, over my discomfort, over my hate of squatting, over my fear of getting hurt, fear of not being able to get back up. I pushed myself, I got better.

Generally we shouldn’t take big leaps: someone that’s never done force-on-force before, even just verbal no-contact role-playing stuff, probably shouldn’t take SouthNarc’s ECQC as a first go. But if the thought of force-on-force is a little scary to you, I urge to to find a “101-level” type of FoF class (e.g. KR Training’s AT-2) and give it a try. I’ve never seen anyone come out of such a class not better for it.

So realize, when your teacher, coach, instructor, whatever pushes you, it’s an attempt to help you get better. If we go too far over the line, it’s not malicious; but do let us know so we can be mindful (because too far will just cause you to shut down and close off to learning). But don’t worry if you feel a little uncomfortable: we all did, we all do, we all will, and we all will grow from it.

Instructor Ethics

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

Here I sit in the too-early morning — even too early for me (stupid daylight savings time). Later today (at the time of this writing, which isn’t the same as the date of publication) I will be sitting in a classroom to renew my Texas Concealed Handgun License Instructor certification.

I dug back through some emails I sent to myself, finding an article Kathy Jackson wrote titled Instructor Ethics 101:

When you step up to teach a self-defense class, you are literally asking students to bet their lives on the quality of the information you have and on your ability to teach it to them. This is no exaggeration, but just the simple truth.

[…]

I have even heard some handgun instructors deny that they are teaching self-defense. “It’s just a carry permit class,” they say — as if people carry guns for any other purpose. Or, “I’m just teaching them to use a handgun, that’s all.” But if your students think otherwise, if they come to you to learn skills they think they can use to protect themselves and their loved ones, you’re still on the hook. It’s so tempting to engage in these kinds of denials, and maybe that’s a more comfortable place for us to live as instructors, but it does our students no good.

As I prepare myself to sit in a room full of other CHL Instructors, I hope every single one of them understands it’s not “just a carry permit class”. That they take the gravity to heart, and will go forth and teach accordingly.

Even for myself, it’s a good reminder.

There may not be enough time for someone else to respond

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Greg Ellifritz writes about the recent Sparks, Nevada school shooting.

4) Time.  The entire attack, from the time the first child was shot until the shooter killed himself, lasted less than three minutes.  Think about that for a second.  You don’t have much time to act.  Don’t expect the police to be able to arrive in time to save you.  You won’t be able to get to your vehicle glove compartment to get the gun you don’t carry “because it’s too heavy.”  You are on your own and will be forced to use whatever gear you have on your person to stop this kind of attack.

Just let the reality of that sink in.

And for those who think there are other strategies you can take:

3) Talking is a poor strategy. The heroic teacher in this case attempted to talk the student down after the student shot his first victim. His heroic attempt was rewarded with a bullet in the chest. Historically, begging, pleading, and talking to the killer has not resulted in positive outcomes. In general, talking should only be considered as a last resort when no other options are available.

So as you go through life, as you make decisions for yourself — and for others — should you make them based upon contending with your dreamy ideal of how the world should be or how you think it is? or contending with the realities of how the world really is?

 

Busting misconceptions

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

It’s always healthy to bust misconceptions. Truth is stronger and better.

When it comes to violence, there are lots of misconceptions out there.

“Why couldn’t the police shoot the knife out of that guys hand? Why did they have to kill him?”

“Why did they pile on top of him with five cops? Poor guy got crushed! Police brutality!”

“Why did you hit him first? He was only yelling,he didn’t even touch you!”

“Why did he hit me? All I did was say that he’s an idiot!”

Or my favorite, that he was unarmed, implying that he wasn’t or couldn’t be a threat.

I think it was through a “like” by BobG that I found this article: “Everything you know about violence is wrong“.

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?

Could you look him in the eye and deny him? – A couple more points

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

To follow up on my prior article, “Could you look him in the eye and deny him?” here’s a couple more points to consider.

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.

What are you going to do when that happens?

Be a victim? or be a survivor?

 

Oh yeah… you’re on your own

/ hsoi

And to follow up on the little Austin riot….

[Cpl. David Boyd with the Austin Police Department] says they normally have a special crowd management team to prepare for large and potentially unruly crowds.

“We weren’t expecting anything, so we didn’t have the team on standby ready to be deployed at any time.”

So, there wasn’t enough police presence. And they didn’t have a team on standby. And so, response took time. In fact, while the video in the original report did have footage from APD’s helicopter, so what? It’s not like the pilot could stop anything (nor was the presence of the helicopter nor police on the ground being any sort of deterrent). In fact, they had to wait for some cars to clear before they could go in.

Suppose you were caught in the middle of that (very possible, given it was happening outside a Halloween attraction), what would you do?

Obviously APD wasn’t set up to save you.

And for those that think we’re paranoid, it’s not that — it’s preparedness. APD, by their own admission, wasn’t prepared. Look at the result. Bad things can happen at any time any where. That doesn’t mean they always will, but that’s of little comfort when you happen to be caught in that rare moment when it does happen.

Have a plan beforehand. Have tools to manage your situation. And better yet? take Farnam’s advice on risk management.

Riot in Austin

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

So a riot broke out in Austin.

Around 11:30 p.m. on Saturday, a crowd of more than 200 people became confrontational outside the House of Torment haunted attraction.
Police say people were throwing rocks and ignoring officers’ commands to leave. They also reportedly refused to back away from police who were dealing with fights. Those brawls spanned from Highland Mall Boulevard around the parking lot to Airport Boulevard.

Read the whole story and watch the video too.

Remember what John Farnam says:

Donʼt go to stupid places; donʼt associate with stupid people; donʼt do stupid things. We will add to that, be in bed by 10 oʼclock.

Looks like failure on all 4 counts.

Could you look him in the eye and deny him?

/ hsoi / 8 Comments

In a prior posting I linked to this video:

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.

 

A tidbit on handguns, from the 2012 FBI UCR

/ hsoi

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.