self defense

Random stuff

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

From today… just some random bits of things.

iPhone

I’m peeved that my iPhone went dead. I have no idea what caused the sudden drain of battery. Google turns up this isn’t an unheard of thing and hypotheses are some apps just are poor at battery management. That perhaps somehow I put the phone to bed with particular apps still running and someone sucked the battery dry. Don’t know, but oh well.

Managing Unknown Contacts

To understand the term “Managing Unknown Contacts” (MUC) see here or here. I failed at this this morning. *sigh* When I left the house this morning I stopped into the drug store to get some food and drink to eat during the match. When I went in I saw a girl (probably 18-25 years old) gathering her stuff on a bench outside the store. I go inside, do my thing, I come back out to my car and the girl approaches me. Initially I was stand-off-ish and unwilling to help her, but she ultimately said she just wanted directions. I answered her question and she went on her way. So, it was probably nothing.

However, I got in the car and realized I failed MUC. I didn’t move well, I didn’t use my hands right (e.g. fence), wrong dialogue. I know why: I was preoccupied with the match. Bad bad bad me. *sigh*

CHL

I am surprised at the number of people who have CHL’s but don’t carry. So… why do you have a CHL?

People at the match seemed surprised that I came to the match carrying and that I wanted to leave the match carrying. They were surprised at my carry. I was surprised at their surprise, and at their lack of carry.

I want to start asking people who have a CHL why they have a CHL if they don’t carry… and carry always (apart from legal or other such reasons).

Reloading

I got to try a Hornady Lock-n-Lock AP. I’m sold. No the Dillon isn’t bad, but there’s no question the LnL AP is evolution.

Walked away with a LOT of 9mm brass today (lots of people didn’t want their brass). Happy me.

Match People

I forgot to mention about the match. I was surprised at the level of shooters. I figured it was a local club and that it might not be that hot… maybe one or two guys, but that’d be it. I was floored at the number of people with “sponsor” shirts on, race guns, and other very serious gear and really into it. Lots of quality shooters. It was good to watch them and how they went about things, from how people choose to handle the course of fire (I like that about IPSC, vs. IDPA) to how they shot (e.g. the steady cadence in particular strings of the stage). Or just being impressed with how fast some of these guys are.

Family

I love my wife. She supports me. She is a rock for me.

Home Invasion Defense Tactics

/ hsoi / 10 Comments

Reading Caleb’s post reminded me of something from a couple weeks ago.

A friend of mine was home alone. She heard some noises upstairs, it freaked her out a bit so she fetched the gun and kept it on the table next to her as she worked. Eventually she was freaked out enough that she opted to leave the house. Later she was given advice that she should have cleared the house because she knows how to do that.

IMHO, that wasn’t the best advice. Maybe she does know how to do it, but that doesn’t mean it was the right thing to do. I also don’t think that leaving was the right thing either.

Best thing? Hunker down. Call the police.

The main question to ask yourself is: “is this worth dying for?”

To go clearing the house could be inviting trouble. You don’t know what’s there and it could be a bigger problem than you’re able to handle, especially if you’re alone.

To leave the house could be a problem too, as you don’t know what’s going on. Maybe someone did break into the house and now there’s dude #1 in the house and dude #2 outside keeping watch while dude #3 is set with the getaway car. You don’t know what’s going on so again you could be walking into trouble.

But what if it’s nothing? Wouldn’t that be a waste of time for the police? Perhaps, but what if it’s something?

Are there cases that you should leave your position? Yes. For instance, a loved one is elsewhere in the house and the trouble appears to be in their general vicinity. In the end it just depends upon the situation and asking yourself “Is it worth dying for?”.

Coyote Attack

/ hsoi

It’s rare for coyotes to attack a human, let alone even get so close. But it can happen.

Take home point is it’s good to be carrying something that can contend with critters, especially if you’re out in the backcountry. I’m still in the market for a good such gun, probably a .44 Mag revolver at this point but still undecided (not much point in making a final decision until the budget permits). In the front-country (i.e. city), OC spray can be useful here.

Why Always?

/ hsoi / 12 Comments

During the Thanksgiving holiday, most of my family will be visiting me in my home. This will be the first time I’ll be around my parents and siblings since I received my concealed handgun license. While they all know I have a CHL, this will be their first experience with it, and my family members are at various places along the spectrum with regards to guns. While I might normally open carry within my home on a normal day, during their entire visit I will carry concealed. Nevertheless, I know one thing likely to cause them to notice:

Hugging, or otherwise touching, me (e.g. taking my arm as we walk).

With a gun on the right and a magazine-flashlight pouch on the left, given how tall I am and how short everyone else is, it’s inevitable someone is going to bump into things. It will be felt, it will be noticed, “What’s that?”, and discussion will ensue. Some family members will have brief discussions, others will likely dwell on it the entire visit and much explanation and justification will have to occur (you open carry advocates that don’t understand why I don’t want to deal with the hassle? you haven’t met my Mom). 😉

That’s what inspired me to write today.

Why always?

I remember when I received my first Leatherman, a Micra. Those of you with small kids may have noticed when you go out to eat, the kid gets a small drink but the straws are all sized for larger drink cups. So now you have small child, with small arms, and a very tall straw that they struggle to get to their lips. Gosh if we just had a pair of scissors! One Father’s Day the Micra was a gift from Wife so I could trim the straws. 🙂  From then on I always carried it on me.

There was also a time, and I don’t recall if this was before or after the Micra but probably before, on Christmas Day. Much opening of presents, which means much battling with packaging. Child comes wanting me to help open something, but there were lots of zip ties. I needed a knife but didn’t have one. My brother-in-law reached into his pocket, pulled out a pocket knife, called Child over and opened things. I felt a little deficient as a father, and vowed that wouldn’t happen again. Currently this role is filled by my Leatherman Wave, which is always in its sheath on my belt.

I never carried any sort of illumination on me, not even a little cheap LED fob on my keychain. Usually I got around OK in the dark, but whenever I really needed light I would go in search of a flashlight. Of course, it was always amusing when the lights would suddenly go out in the house at night, then you make your way to where you think the flashlight should be but someone didn’t put it back in the proper place when they were done with it and now you’re cussing as you try to fumble in the dark looking for a source of light. In speaking with Karl some time ago he told me how he always carries some sort of light on him. I bought a SureFire E2L and have been carrying it ever since. Used to just keep it clipped to a pocket (usually back left), but now I have a dedicated place for it on my belt. You don’t think about how useful a flashlight can be to have on you until you have one on you and can use it when you need it.

That’s the crux of this: tools are useful if you have need for them, then have them handy when you need them.

Tools are devices that facilitate performing a task. I could drive a nail into a board with my hand, but it’d be rather difficult to accomplish. I could use a shoe or a rock or something else as a make-shift tool, and that would facilitate the task more than my bare hand, but nowhere near as well as a proper tool for the job like a hammer.

I am a software developer by trade. Consequently in my daily life I don’t need a hammer. Sometimes I need a hammer, to hang a picture or to repair something, and when I do need a hammer it’s not a big inconvenience to go to the garage and get the hammer out of my toolbox. Certainly going to the garage is more convenient than going to ask a neighbor or having to visit a store to buy or rent one. To always carry a hammer on my person would be very convenient but given how infrequently I need a hammer and how it’s rarely an emergency item, it doesn’t make much sense for me to always carry a hammer. Thus storing the hammer in the garage is handy enough for me. For a professional carpenter, always having to go to the garage would be problematic, thus a carpenter is likely to wear a specialized toolbelt so the hammer can be stored there and thus always at the carpenter’s fingertips while they work their day on the jobsite.

As we can see, tools are good things because they facilitate our performing a task. But for the tool to be useful we need to be performing a relevant task, thus having need for that particular tool. Then what increases the utility of the tool is for it to be handy and present when we need it.

I don’t know when I’m going to have to cut something open, but I do it enough times that my life is made easier by always carrying/wearing my Leatherman Wave. Package comes in the mail, I can instantly cut it open without having to go seek out a knife to cut the packaging tape. A few weeks ago when I was installing shelves in my garage I was up on the ladder working and needed a screwdriver; I could have gotten down off the ladder and went to the toolbox, but instead I just reached onto my belt for my Leatherman and kept right on working. If I need to go outside at night, it’s mostly illuminated but perhaps I have to walk through an area that’s a bit dark and I want to ensure I’m not stepping on a rattlesnake (they occasionally appear in the yard); it’s nice to have that flashlight on me right then and there, not having to go back inside, fetch the light, then resume my work. I’ve been through many experiences were having the Leatherman or the flashlight or some other thing on me at the time opportunity knocked proved to be best. Sure every situation is different, everyone has different needs and tolerance levels. This is what works for me.

Consider things that aren’t necessarily tools but that you might carry with you every day. You carry your wallet, which holds credit cards, drivers license, money. You may not always need those things, but you’re happy to have them there when you do. Doesn’t it suck when you go to pay for something then realize you left your wallet in the car or at home? Maybe you carry a comb or a brush. You want to ensure you look your best, but it’s a bummer when the wind blows your hair and now all you can use is use your fingers in hopes of fixing your do. Maybe you carry breath mints, because making that first impression on the cutie that just appeared across the way goes over better if your breath doesn’t smell like the garlic and onion bagel you just ate. We carry certain things on us because we expect we may need them at some time; we may not know exactly when, but we expect we will and  life is facilitated when we have them on hand at the time of need.

So why do I (almost) always carry a gun?

Because it can be a useful tool. No, I’m not talking useful in a Homer Simpson way. This is one of those situations where there isn’t a daily need. In fact, it’s one of those instances where I actually hope I never have a need for it. But it’s also one of those instances where if I ever do have a need for it, I’m going to need it right now and be rather thankful I have it so handy. As the saying goes, you don’t want it until you need it, but when you need it you need it really really bad. Look at Caleb’s recent experience. He didn’t know he needed it until he needed it, and when he needed it he was thankful it was handy.

I don’t know when I will need to physically defend myself, but I expect some day I might. I may train in empty-hand martial arts, I may train with stick and knives, but I know a gun is a superior tool for the task. I carry these useful tools with me because if I expect I may someday need them, I do know if I ever need it it will only be useful to me if it’s handy when I need it. Being at my side keeps it handy. I cannot predict when that need may come, thus I have to fall back on the old Boy Scout training to Be Prepared.

Breda is often quoted because she’s right: carry your gun — it’s a lighter burden than regret.

 

Blauer on Street Psychology

/ hsoi

Tony Blauer discusses psychological aspects of preparedness:

  1. Golden Rules:
    1. Acceptance
    2. Get Challenged
    3. Don’t Stop Thinking
  2. Create A Directive
  3. Never Telegraph Preparedness
  4. Identify Your Natural Stances
  5. Identify Force Continuum (if possible)
  6. See Your Strategy With A Successful Resolution
  7. No Fear
  8. Stay Detached
  9. Closest Weapon/Closest Target
  10. Negotiate

For elaboration on these points, go read the article.

Getting Involved

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

Another good post from Matthew over at Ikigai, discussing another video that’s been going around. In short, some TV show was filming a prank and the prank backfired when the prankster/actor got a wicked kick to the face from a Good Samaritan. You can watch it below. You’ll see all you need to see in about the first 10 seconds of the video.

Speaking purely as a martial artist about the kick… awesome kick. 🙂

But what Matthew really wants to discuss is getting involved.

Part of me applauds him for his quick thinking and desire to help make the world a little more scum-free. It takes courage and conviction to step in and aid your fellow man. Furthermore, his technique selection was probably a good one – if he tried to tackle the guy, he ran the risk of getting stabbed or shot while tussling. If he tried to stand in the bad guy’s way non-violently he would have gotten bowled over or pushed aside.

I too want to applaud the guy. He heard something bad going down and wasn’t going to let bad things stand. Given what he knew about the situation at the time, he did the right thing.

Unfortunately, as we see in this video, quick acts of effective violence are sometimes misplaced. As it turns out, there was no theft occurring, and the man in the leather jacket was angry and loud because he was annoyed at the childish prank pulled on him. The striped-shirt-kicker made a big leap in judgment assuming that the man trying to escape was both a.) a perpetrator of crime, and b.) the actual bad guy in the situation (he might have been trying to escape a bad situation himself).

This is a very good point. Just because you see things unfold a certain way doesn’t necessarily mean that’s how things are. So you’re pulling up to a convenience store and you see someone running out in a panic saying they store has just been robbed. You would naturally assume the person saying this was a victim, or at least not the thief. But if they were a clever thief they may well have used that as a ruse to distract you so they could get away. Things may not always be what they seem.

Furthermore, the kicker took the law into his own hands and introduced violence into a non-violent situation. In a crowded mall like that, it is very possible to grab the attention of nearby security and alert the authorities to a crime in progress. In most large shopping centers there is both mall security and real law enforcement officials nearby.

I take odds with this. Where was the nearby security guard? Watch the video. Much time passes and at least I would think if there was a security guard around they would have gotten involved in the scene… someone lying on the ground, people huddled around minding them… wouldn’t a security guard get involved? I never saw any security guard in the scene. Meantime, a potential scumbag gets away. It’s just like the old saying: when seconds count, police are only minutes away!

Nevertheless, the discussion is a valid one: should you get involved?

In this case, it was just a kick. How about people who carry concealed handguns? There’s greater potential for lethality there. The rule generally is that you should only draw your gun if you or someone else’s life is in danger. You use the gun to defend life, not to stop a criminal and/or hold them at bay. In a case like this, no one’s life was in danger so no gun should come out. If the gun did come out, it greatly changes the situation for all involved parties.

Me, I’m torn on getting involved. My heart says yes, get involved. Bad things should not be allowed to stand, even stupid prank shows that pull crap like this (IMHO, they reaped what they sowed here). My head knows that there’s great risk for legal and other trouble if I did get involved. Is it worth it? It’s hard to say. To me, it all depends upon the circumstance and situation, and that I can’t know until I’m there and in it. One good question to ask yourself is: is it worth dying for?

I don’t feel good people should be or feel crippled to help those in need, because the bad guys certainly feel no restrictions. It’s sad that our society is moving in a direction that encumbers good people and makes them have to think twice about doing the right and good thing.

The Three C’s

/ hsoi

The following was written by Tom Givens. I merely reformatted it.

I recently saw an interview with Bill Murphy, a senior instructor at Gunsite. He said the purpose of professional firearms training was the Three C’s: Competence, Confidence, and Control. According to Murphy, Competence begets Confidence. Confidence allows you to stay in control of yourself, and the situation. Sage advice.

Competence: It’s really hard to imagine how anyone could argue for less competence in a life saving skill. The defensive use of a firearm has vast, far reaching implications. You may not need a defensive firearm more than once or twice in your entire lifetime, but the need will be extremely severe. Your life, the lives of loved ones, and the lives of innocent third parties may literally hinge upon your competence. Your actions will be reviewed long after the fact by both civil and criminal authorities, and poor performance on your part may ruin the rest of your life, assuming you survived the encounter. There is simply no excuse for being incompetent with a firearm, if you’re going to carry one for self defense.

Murphy touched on the other, often overlooked aspect of competence. As you train and practice you build skill. As you build skill, you also build confidence. Confidence: This is an essential characteristic of successful warriors. If your team gets on the bus thinking, “We’re going to get our butts kicked tonight”, guess what. You sure are! You lost that game before you ever set foot on the playing field. Confidence in one’s skills allows the mind to remain calm and assess tactical options. This avoids panic and translates into efficient motion and good hits. You must be able to keep your wits about you in a crisis, and this is far easier if your own mind knows you have the physical skills to deal with the situation. Note that this is NOT bravado, but a calm assurance that you have the skills needed to win.

Control: Ninety percent of gunfighting is mental. If you can control yourself, you can control the situation. This is made infinitely easier if your physical skills (gunhandling/marksmanship) have been ingrained through hard work to a reflexive level. This frees the mind to work on the other issues, like keeping watch on their hands, being aware of nearby cover or escape routes, where are bystanders/family members, etc. You cannot keep up with these variables and think about how to run your gear at the same time. Confidence in your gear and your skills give you control.

Competence/Confidence/Control

What’s your score?

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

James Rummel found an interesting website.

Rate your Risk

I took the test for being beaten. Scored -35. “(Negative score) A minus score indicates that the criminal would be in danger FROM YOU. The greater the negative score…the greater the danger.”

Took the burglary test and scored a 6.

Inasmuchas an Internet test can judge such things. 🙂

Yeah, the tests are certainly dated, but if you look at the questions and criteria asked, you can gain some useful information about ways to better your chances.

Video analysis

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

So the hot new video to watch, examine, and learn from:

This is actually an old video as I saw it some long time ago. Nevertheless, t3h Int3rw3bz knows how to recycle, so here we are.

Over at Ikigai, he provided a reasonable analysis: the victim didn’t lose his cool, kept it simple, the victim sought to end the confrontation and once it was over let it be done. However, I don’t like what happened in the video.

The thug got too close, way too close. The thug put his hands on the victim. For me, none of that should have happened in the first place. This is where skills like Practical Unarmed Combat come into play: Managing Unknown Contacts (MUC), The Fence, and other such techniques really need to be applied. The situation should never have gotten to the point it did. But if someone did manage to get up in your face, that’s why that fence is important… to be able to hit that “default position”, eye flicks, or whatever else may be necessary. Having your hands folded and down like that, there’s no way you’d be able to get them up in time to be of any use to you… not with an attacker in that close.

In fact if we want to talk fences, how did this thug get past the homeowner’s physical yard fence? Now you’re trespassing on my property, and that changes things a whole lot. Granted, I think the video was in the UK and unfortunately law-abiding citizens are neutered there, but here in Texas and in much of the United States there is the Castle Doctrine and that plays into effect in a situation like this.

I will say that the outcome shown on the video was fortunate and the thug was lucky all he got was a bruised ego. The victim was lucky he was able to walk away with just his yard to clean up. To me, the take-home lesson is to not allow situations to get to that point. Acquire and use skills to prevent such situations in the first place.

But what if…? Well, seek training.

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

OK, I’ll concede.

Just because you have a license to carry a concealed handgun doesn’t mean you truly know how to use it. Oh sure, you are probably good enough on the range, in an unpressured environment, taking your time, shooting a stationary cardboard/paper target. Take a look at the shooting/skills requirements for the Texas CHL. Certainly if you can’t do that you have no business carrying. I agree with the sentiment on that page that while 70% is passing, if you can’t pass with 90% on the first cold try you should seriously consider additional training. IMHO, to obtain a CHL is not an end, it’s a beginning. Consider it your pass to take additional training. Many top training schools will only accept students with a CHL for their non-entry-level classes. The CHL demonstrates good character, demonstrates some measure of understanding handgun skills. Obtaining your CHL should (must?) be viewed not as your final destination, merely the key necessary for opening the door to better training and improved skills.

I seek to encourage people to obtain as much education and training as possible because I believe it’s important. When the shit hits the fan, will you be able to perform at the level the situation requires? My primary instructor, Karl Rehn, said it best:

Shooters, more than any other group, suffer from delusions of competence.

I know I’ve suffered from it, and probably to some extent I still do. It keeps me practicing, it keeps me taking classes, and seeking out ways to improve myself.

Why is this so important? One argument by people against concealed carry by law-abiding citizens is that the citizen might screw up, for instance, shoot an innocent bystander. The purpose of training is to minimize undesirable and maximize desirable performance. Why would you want to perform at any level less than desirable?

Nevertheless, the arguments are put forth. What prompted me to write this article was a posting made to a mailing list by J.K.:

But I don’t see how those are realistic and logical arguments. Whoever the active shooter is, like Cho at Virginia Tech, it’s going to be VERY clear to any observer who is the bad guy. He’s the one walking around shooting guns at people who are running and cowering in fear for their lives. Anyone putting fire downrange at Cho at VT would have helped the situation far more than hurt it, even if they winged or killed someone innocent downrange. How many people did Cho kill? 33? What would the total body count have been if someone had shot back in the 2nd classroom he attacked? Even assuming he wasn’t injured in that imaginary exchange, would he likely have continued calmly walking from room to room, executing students, after getting shot at? I doubt it.

So yes, innocent people MIGHT get hurt with a good samaritan gunfighter. But innocent people actually WERE getting hurt by the murderer. And without the good samaritan, MORE innocent people would be hurt, not fewer. What most people who argue against this fail to realize or recognize is that violent criminals aren’t generally looking for gunfights. They’re looking for victims. As soon as it turns into an actual fight where they’re taking fire, it dramatically alters their plans.

Look at the stats, and you’ll see that far more good than harm is done by regular citizens who attempt self-defense with a gun. The tragic stray bullet killing an innocent kid scenario pretty much never happens.

These are the facts, based upon all the active shooter situations we’ve had over the past some decades.

Nevertheless, I think with the dramatic rise in people obtaining their concealed handgun licenses, the more training we each receive the better. Not so much to ensure a minimization of collateral damage, but more to ensure a maximization of desired outcomes. If you really want to stop innocents from getting injured, we need more sheepdogs.