self defense

Defensive bottlecaps

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

So there’s this thing…. the Bottle Bezel Self-Defense tool. (h/t to James Rummel).

Self-defense bottle caps. Um… OK. It’s certainly novel.

Now, let’s ignore the whole issue of bottled water, and the fact that a gun or a knife trumps a lump of knobby plastic atop your water or soda bottle (both you being attacked by, and that they’d be better tool choices for yourself).

Could this thing be a reasonable self-defense tool?

Actually, maybe it could. Maybe.

I think about dan bong (short stick) techniques, seen in Korean martial arts such as Kuk Sool, Hapkido, and Hwa Rang Do (and their variants). Not that I think this bottle cap actually could work dan bong style, but it’s something I’m familiar with and as soon as I saw the bottle cap and thought a bit about it, dan bong techniques came to mind. One premise of dan bong techniques is directing hits to sensitive/vital areas, pressure point targets, and so on. This article describes some of the points, but lacks visuals. So instead, here I have a visual taken from Kali, and I have seen a similar illustration from a Modern Arnis book I have by Remy Presas. You can click on the picture for more details (it’s discussing the Presas approach), and you can see the basic striking points and angles of attack. Dan bong is similar. While with this bottle cap you may not take a true Kali/Arnis/Eskrima or Korean dan bong type of strikes, thinking about those weaponologies… take strikes with the butt-end of the stick, apply them to these vital target areas. And so yeah, maybe a knobby lump of plastic might do something. I would think the cap would be more effective applied to bony areas, bare skin (clothing pads and would diminish the effects)… striking, grinding it in.

But on that token, I think that’s where the cap has limited application. Someone attacks you middle of winter, they’ll be rather covered up… where are you going to strike them?  Or even if it’s in the summer and lots of flesh is exposed, the striking/grinding application of the cap is only going to be effective in certain places. I guess go for the head and hope. Which brings up another point… this is a contact weapon. You’re going to have to be close in to use it, and that’s probably too close for comfort. This is where tools that utilize projectiles are useful.

I also wonder about the structural integrity of the bottle. Many bottles now are being made out of very skimpy and flimsy plastic, so bottles collapse and crush pretty easily. Can those bottles withstand such a use? And would you trust your life to that? Maybe these will screw on top of the steel (reusable) water bottles. Most of the steel ones I’ve seen have a female top with a male cap, and this Bottle Bezel is a female cap for the male disposable bottle tops… so unlikely to work unless you can find a steel one set up the right way. But steel would be better than plastic bottles. Then perhaps you could use other striking techniques with the bottle itself, but even that’s a bit unwieldy.

I’ll say this. While I applaud their efforts to create a “less lethal” self-defense tool, one key part of self-defense is to stop the attack so you can escape. Is this bottle cap going to stop an attack? By look alone? I highly doubt it. I mean, flash a gun or a knife and attackers typically stop… flash a bottle cap?  Then by effective application? Well, perhaps, but it seems so limited and difficult to trust. 

I don’t know. Maybe. I haven’t actually seen or played with one so I can’t make a complete assessment. But just looking at the logic of it all, I can’t see it. If they really want to market it as a self-defense tool, they ought to show how it can be used. Give us some honest material and ways to view this as anything other than a gimmick or talisman. Maybe they can create their own martial art and call it “H2-Do” (sorry, the pun was there). At this point, it’s not something I’d put my faith in. I have more effective and proven tools, and I’ll stick with those.

You want facts? Here’s facts.

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

The Florida State University’s Research in Review magazine Winter 2009 issue has as their cover story an interview with Gary Kleck. (h/t to Sebastian)

Whenever people talk about “gun control” (in a manner other than “use both hands”), far too often what you hear from them is emotional arguments (see here and here and here). If you hear any data or facts, it’s usually vague and incorrect, or just a flat out lie (tho usually well-intended, but that’s what paves the road to Hell). While I can’t fault people for going with their emotions, legislating and regulating a citizenry because of how you feel usually doesn’t make for sound policy. Facts, hard data, and research make for a more solid foundation upon which to build. So if you want such things regarding guns, Gary Kleck is the man to turn to. For those that will offhand dismiss him as being an NRA shill, he’s not. Read the article.

Rangemaster in the news

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

The March 19-25, 2009 issue of The Memphis Flyer has a cover story on a handgun permit class.

Apparently one of the Flyer’s senior editors, Michael Finger, went through the class just a little while ago, without mentioning to the Rangemaster folks who he was or his intent to write a story. The story is factual and accurately depicts the process that beginning students go through at Rangemaster. Apart from the whole “clip vs. magazine” thing (minor nit), it’s a good article. Give it a read.

Humility may save your life

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

I train in an empty hand martial art. I train with guns. Some would say I have a greater ability than the average citizen to hurt other people and perhaps end their life. And there’s no question, when you start to learn these things you get a big confidence boost in your ability to take care of yourself. Unfortunately, ego can get in the way… and you can get over-confident, and that could get you killed.

Over-confidence can lead to a false sense of what your skills and abilities actually are. Over-confidence might lead you to make choices, especially in the heat of the moment, that turn out to be less than correct and could lead you into greater trouble. And worse? Being over-confident might lead you to be arrogant, and that could lead to you getting your ass handed to you.

What is the point of self-defense? To come out alive with as little injury as possible. A realistic humility aids in this endeavor. If I know it’s a bad part of town, while perhaps I could take care of myself just fine, why should I even put myself in that situation in the first place? If there’s no need to go there, don’t. There we go, I’ve just defended myself, came out alive, no injury to myself. I didn’t let my ego get in the way with a “I’m going to go there, and if any punk tries to mess with me I’m going to fuck him up good!” sort of mentality — that’s more than likely just going to get me in trouble.

Realize as well that just because you have those particular skills doesn’t mean you have to use them. It’s the old “you have a hammer so everything looks like a nail” problem. I recall my first “force-on-force” scenario. I had a (fake) gun, I felt like I had to use it (it’s a gun class after all, right?). But in fact, that was the wrong answer; the best answer was to just call the police and avoid putting myself in a potentially dangerous situation. It was a humbling experience. Yes, my ego felt really bruised to have gotten the answer so wrong. I wanted to rationalize, I wanted to make excuses, I wanted to save face. But that’s the wrong way to go about it because I wouldn’t learn. Better to make the mistake in a forgiving environment and learn from it. The experience was humbling in and of itself, and by accepting my mistake in a humble manner, it’s a lesson that’s stuck with me and I’d like to hope I’m a little better off for it.

If someone opts to get in your face for something stupid, just apologize. Back off. Yield. Take on a submissive posture (tho still have the mental preparation and wherewithal to respond should the situation turn ugly). Even if you were wrong, still apologize. What’s more important? Being right? Or being alive and uninjured? This isn’t to say be wishy-washy, it’s to say you should be smart, you should be wise, and you should maximize the course of action that allows you to stay alive and unharmed. Don’t let your ego, your testosterone, your fantasy, your false sense of honor, get in the way and get you hurt.

Be humble. Yield. Knowing how to yield is strength (Tao Te Ching 52). Ponder Tao Te Ching 59:

The generals have a saying:
“Rather than make the first move
it is better to wait and see.
Rather than advance an inch
it is better to retreat a yard.”

This is called
going forward without advancing,
pushing back without using weapons.

There is no greater misfortune
than underestimating your enemy.
Underestimating your enemy
means thinking that he is evil.
Thus you destroy your three treasures
and become an enemy yourself.

When two great forces oppose each other,
the victory will go
to the one that knows how to yield.

Why She Carries

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Syd wrote a wonderful piece titled “I Don’t Carry A Gun.” Kellene wrote a, I guess you could call it a companion piece, titled “Why This Woman Carries A Firearm.”

We live in a society that strives to put women and men on equal footing, and there’s certainly a lot of merit in that as there are many situations and context where gender and gender-based differences don’t matter. On the flip side, we cannot ignore that there are differences between men and women. When it comes to matters of self-protection, many things are gender-neutral, but there’s no question some things are gender-specific. Kellene articulates some of these quite well. I especially love her final reason:

I carry a firearm because as a woman I have the privilege of giving life.  That’s right.  I don’t carry a gun to take life, but to ensure that it’s fully given to those who choose live.  


911 didn’t answer

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

An elderly woman in Parker County, Texas dials 911 repeatedly, and receives no answer, repeatedly.

Eventually the woman’s daughter and son-in-law arrived and were able to hold the intruder at gunpoint. Finally 911 gets through. Police are dispatched and arrive 13 minutes later… 13… minutes… later.

According to the article:

[Capt. Mike Morgan of the Parker County sheriff’s office] said he understands the family’s frustration. But he said records show that when 911 dispatchers answered the calls, the family had hung up.

Morgan said cellphone calls can take up to 30 seconds to connect in the dispatch center.

Cellphone technology is great, but it still has problems. When you’re in a situation like this, 30 seconds is going to seem like an eternity. Even still, how much evil can happen in 30 seconds time? And then, 13 minutes to respond.

As the saying goes, when seconds count, police are only minutes away.

While it’s nice to know there are other people in this world that are willing to keep you safe from harm, in the end the only person you can count on being around when you’re being attacked is you. You’re in the best position to preserve yourself. Ms. Hokett now knows that:

Hokett said she hopes she never needs 911 again. But just in case, she said her daughter bought her a shotgun that she has places near her bed.

All those things take time.

/ hsoi

It took 80 minutes for the Princeton campus alert system to notify students of a possible gunman on campus. (h/t to SayUncle).

With HB 1893 and SB 1164 up for consideration in the Texas Legislature, and after having spoken with my Texas State Representative about this, maybe we can look deeper into these campus safety systems.

From the article:

Greil then called Public Safety at 11:24 p.m. and spoke with them for 13 minutes, according to her phone records.

Within one minute of Greil’s call, Public Safety had contacted Borough Police, Cliatt said. Minutes later, Public Safety and Borough Police officers were canvassing the area. The officers had already begun their patrol at 11:29 p.m. when Public Safety received a second call with a similar report.

So basically, call goes in and it takes about 5 minutes before formalized law enforcement shows up on scene to start working. If we look at the Virginia Tech data, every minute Cho killed at least 3 people and shot a total of 4. So in 5 minutes of response time, a little math shows us that 20 people would be shot, at least 15 killed.  Now, it took 80 minutes before the campus alert system notified the students. Go ahead, do some math.

The article continues:

At 12:40 a.m., when the threat was found to be credible, the University sent out the first warning messages via the Princeton Telephone and E-mail Notification System (PTENS). Students told the ‘Prince’ that they received the message between 12:45 and 12:48 a.m.

So it took 76 minutes for them to determine the threat was credible. Then it took an additional 5-8 minutes before students received word. Go ahead, do the math.

The article continues:

Executive Vice President Mark Burstein said he was “extremely satisfied” with the emergency response. “Both our Public Safety department and the Borough Police reacted quickly. The speed with which they responded was very reassuring,” Burstein said in an interview at around 2:30 a.m. Saturday. “Our notification systems worked well.”

Well, I guess the system functioned correctly, but even then 5-8 minutes is a very long time. Again, do the math.

The article continues:

Cliatt also praised the University’s response, adding that she did not believe the 80-minute gap between the first report and the notification of the campus community was unnecessarily long.

“The things that took place in that time period obviously took 80 minutes,” she said, noting that all “action steps” taken during this period were necessary. “Canvassing the area, getting access to prox information to see if various dorms had been accessed, convening the task force, putting together the alert message, all those things take time,” she explained.

All those things take time. Killing at least 3 people and shooting a total of 4 every minute… that takes time too.

The article continues:

Cliatt also emphasized that the University considers the fear and anxiety caused by emergency alerts when deciding whether a threat is sufficiently credible to merit issuing an alert. “The safety of our community is our top priority, and that includes both the physical and the emotional safety of our campus,” she said.

Ah, the emotional scarring of our children. Because fear and anxiety of the sheeple is more concerning and emotionally scarring than seeing your friend die in your arms, or a parent dealing with the loss of their child.

 

Thankfully in this situation it was just someone exercising poor judgement and I hope they are dealt with accordingly. But it still demonstrates failure of these systems to truly keep people safe.

Mantis blocks

/ hsoi / 8 Comments

Some time ago in my training I made a point to always keep my hands up. That is, I see all too often when people are doing kicking drills that they focus only on the kicking and their feet/legs… the rest of the body tends to be ignored, and this is most evident to observe in how they hold their hands or more typically how they aren’t holding their hands at all. I resolved to not do this, that even if I was focusing on something else that my hands must remain up in a proper defensive/blocking position: hands more or less guarding the sides of the face, forearms more or less vertical, elbows pulled in close so you’re not leaving your gut unprotected. Of course going with this, doing things like shrugging the shoulders, chin tucked, but that’s not the focus of my discussion today. The point of ensuring I always kept my hands up was to turn that positioning into my habit, that that’s just the place my hands naturally go — and stay. The stay is an important part. I see people might start with their hands up, but eventually the hands migrate somewhere else. Maybe their arms are getting tired (keep them up there, they’ll get stronger). Maybe they just forget (keep doing it, be aware of it, make it habit). Or many times they’re doing something dynamic and their arms leave their center so they can keep their balance. To that I say, you have to fight to keep your hands in. First, if with every kick your hands fly out so you can keep your balance that tells me (fighting/sparring you) that you’re not very balanced and I’ll either take advantage of that aspect or take advantage of the fact you’re not guarding yourself and attack those areas. Second, when you flail your arms you’re creating more movement, which will lead to further balance disruption, not to mention you’re wasting energy working all those muscles that don’t need to be worked. Keep your hands in, force yourself to do this. You’ll find that your balance will come along just fine.

One thing about keeping your hands up is what to do with your hands themselves. Should you make tight fists? Should you have a fist but just not clenched? Hands in a natural and relaxed but curved but not a full fist looseness? Or maybe have the hands fully straight, fingers extended, palm flat? I have been taking the relaxed approach, a semi-fist, if you will. A few days ago I started to play with keeping my hands flat. I’m going to experiment with this for a while and see where it goes. Here’s my thoughts.

  1. With my hands flat there is now more stuff guarding me. Measure from the tip of my elbow up the forearm to the end of my closed fist, then measure from the elbow to the tip of my extended fingers and you’ll find a few more inches there. That’s a few more inches of protection for myself. Granted it’s fingers, not someting that can absorb a lot of damage (nor do you want them to), plus having the fingers out there leaves them open to finger grabs/locks. Still, I’d like to play with this to see if it really does add any more guarding effectiveness.
  2. It’s good to use natural weapons, parts of our body that are naturally tougher, such as the palm heel. While fists are your traditional “fightin’ man’s” weapon, punching someone in the head with your bare fist is more likely to hurt you than them. Which would you rather do? punch a brick wall with your fist? or punch a brick wall with your palm heel?  I’ll take the palm  heel. The further implication is you’ll be more willing to put more power behind the palm strike because you’re not as worried about getting hurt. Keeping your fingers functioning is important, be you looking to further trap or manipulate your opponent, or perhaps transitioning to say a sidearm. So by keeping my hands open when up in the guard, I’m more apt and open to use palm strikes than closed fist attacks.
  3. One technique in Kuk Sool is the Sa Ma Gui Mak–Gi (사마귀막기) or Praying Mantis Block. This is a trapping and control technique, one that I’ve dabbled with a bit in the past, but I think I’d like to take the time to more seriously study and experiment with practical application. Starting from my hands-up guarding position, with open palms, a block can lead directly into a mantis block and trap. 
  4. I think my desire to explore the mantis block/trap more actually started in earnest about a month ago. I was flipping through my copy of Dr. YANG, Jwing-Ming’s Analysis of Shaolin Chin Na book because he has a lot of exercises for wrist strength and I’ve been looking to improve my wrist/grip strength for other activities. I was reading over his exercises for trapping, twisting, gripping, but especially the coiling training. So it got me thinking about mantis blocking/trapping again.

As I was preparing to write this blog entry, I Googled around for more information on Chinese praying mantis kung fu. I found a video that was most interesting.

I admit, I don’t have a lot of direct exposure to any flavor of Chinese Praying Mantis Kung Fu, and most of what I do see is the performance of forms.  But this video is the sort of thing I wanted to see: 2 man fighting techniques/drills, application. Here’s what stood out to me.

  1. Notice the attacker/defender (person performing the techniques) has their hands up, in the guard position. That’s the position they fight from, which is efficient and deceptive.
  2. I like how both arms are always doing something. One arm blocks the other attacks, then they switch roles. Watch the exchange that starts at 0:30 to really see this.
  3. Notice the use of natural weapons: palm heels, elbows, hammer-fists. Big strong meat of the forearms provides the block, the palm and the elbows provide the attack.

Very cool stuff. Something for me to focus my study on for a while.

 

Updated: All of yesterday I was involved in helping teach a different sort of combative art. One of the movements done is that you start out with your hands put up in front of you, open palms, palms facing out, hands more or less in front of your face. It’s not hands above your head in an “I surrender” position. It’s not hands pulled back so your arms are fully bent, elbows down by your hipbones and hands up at your shoulders, which isn’t quite “I surrender” but is a very submissive position. It’s not hands pushed out in front of you, arms fully or almost fully extended, as if to push a person in front of you back; this is a very aggressive position. No, it’s more that your hands are just out in front of you, just enough, palms open and facing forward, which is an assertive stance that could say “Hey man, I don’t want any trouble. Just stay cool. This is a very reasonable position to start from, especially in a self-defense situation. If you do some things like avert your eyes just slightly, it provides a little more submissiveness to the position, which can be good towards helping diffuse a situation (but that doesn’t mean you are being submissive, perhaps just manipulative of the situation).

When you look at this posture, what is it? It’s the same posture I’m describing above. That guarding stance, hands open, arms up.  Look at the non-verbal message it sends to an attacker. It’s not taking an aggressive and obvious fighting stance (clench your fists or even loosely ball them). It’s not putting you in a negative position such hands above your head, or at your side, out of position to attack or defend. It leaves you guarded, defended, but sending a good message to an attacker. You can combine it with verbal commands “STOP, DON’T MOVE!” “BACK OFF NOW!” or perhaps just less assertive spoken words such as “Hey man, I don’t want any trouble.” or whatever is clear and appropriate for the situation. From this posture you can then transition to whatever may be necessary. You’ve got your hands in close, you can shoot your body inside his for takedowns. You can defend against strikes. You can do as I’m exploring above and be able to perform mantis-based traps and locks. You could transition to your sidearm. You could just transition to other non-verbals as needed, e.g. maybe you have to push your hands out further to be more aggressive and sending a stronger message.

The more I consider this sort of open handed guard position, the more potential I see within it.

My State Representative’s response to HB 1893

/ hsoi / 12 Comments

HB 1893 (and SB 1164) has been introduced to the Texas Legislature. So like any good citizen, I took the time to write my elected officials. My State Representative is Valinda Bolton. She has a “C” grade from the NRA. One thing I appreciate about Rep. Bolton is every time I write her I do receive a prompt reply (well-run office/staffers). In the past the reply letters (always snail mailed, tho I sent her email) were rather boilerplate in nature and were generally of a “thank you for writing and sharing your comments on whatever matter with me, when/if it comes up I’ll study all sides of the matter and make the best decision possible, thank you drive thru.”. I’ll admit, I don’t expect a personalized letter, but it’s very difficult to tell from boilerplate letters exactly where she stands on an issue so I can know how she’s likely inclined to vote on the matter. So this last time when I wrote to her  regarding HB 1893 I actually made comment on that to her. To my pleasant surprise, her latest response to me was not a boilerplate at all. It answered my specific questions, used specific talking points from my email to her, and given the attribution at the bottom of the letter it does appear she actually composed the letter. So she’s got my respect for doing that. 

Allow me to reprint the full text of her letter.

Dear Mr. Daub

I am sorry if you felt the previous responses to your letters were boilerplate. In fact, while we do use a basic template for all our constituent correspondence, the body of each reply is specifically tailored to each individual.

In reference to your request for my stance on guns, I do support the right of Americans to own a gun. I believe guns are useful tools in the hands of responsible, well-trained individuals licensed to carry them. However, in an environment like a college campus, I feel that guns would be more of a liability than a tool. Thus, I cannot support allowing the carrying of concealed handguns on college campuses. While the shootings at the University of Texas and Virginia Tech were tragic, they are still rare occurrences best handled by law enforcement professionals, trained in both the use of firearms and crisis management. As for the more ordinary dangers you describe of female students walking across campus late at night, most campuses offer escort services where a public safety officer will accompany a student to her car or destination.

I  hope this answers your questions about my stance on gun-related issues. I do appreciate you writing to me and sharing your thoughts and opinions.

Sincerely,

Valinda Bolton

Texas State Representative

VB/mh

I don’t have a copy of my email to her, but in it I did mention the UT shootings and how the situation was aided by students going back to their dorm rooms, fetching their deer rifles, and shooting back. I also mentioned how we don’t need to just consider unique incidents like mass shootings by a crazy person, but consider daily mundane issues such as a girl walking across campus late at night — mugging, robbery, sexual assault, rape, etc. as these are things well worth protecting against as well. So to Rep. Bolton’s credit, she did work to address my specific message to her, and again I do appreciate that.

So, let’s start to look at Rep. Bolton’s response.

I do support the right of Americans to own a gun.

That’s a good start, and explains why her NRA grade isn’t an “F”.

I believe guns are useful tools in the hands of responsible, well-trained individuals licensed to carry them.

A few things here:

  • So guns are only useful if you are responsible AND well-trained AND licensed to carry them. 
  • Can a college student not be responsible AND well-trained AND licensed to carry a concealed handgun? It sounds like she believes that cannot be the case. Let’s not forget, all college students are not 18-21 years old, and I say that because the “responsible” portion is certainly arugable there. 🙂  What about folks that opt to go back to school later in life? That 40-year-old single mother that opts to attend night classes to better her lot in life so she can get a better job to better provide for her children.
  • Given the requirements in the Republic of Texas to obtain a Concealed Handgun License, you’re going to have to be a responsible, well-trained individual in order to obtain that license to carry a concealed handgun. So Rep. Bolton, according to the laws of our State, a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun is responsible and is well-trained. So… why can’t they carry their concealed handgun on campus?

Continuing:

However, in an environment like a college campus, I feel that guns would be more of a liability than a tool.

Why? And note she used the word “feel.” I understand this, “feel” vs. “think” because I carefully choose the use of those words myself. The implication is using her emotions to make this decision, not her reason, not her logic, not facts, not reality. Just how she feels.

While the shootings at the University of Texas and Virginia Tech were tragic, they are still rare occurrences best handled by law enforcement professionals, trained in both the use of firearms and crisis management.

Yeah, and look how well they handled them. Again back when Charles Whitman went crazy, students obtained their deer rifles from their dorm rooms and shot back; this helped to reduce the damage Whitman could inflict from that point on — armed citizens fighting back made a difference. And is the implication there that private citizens cannot have this training? That private citizens are incapable of doing such things? Oh yeah… gotta let someone else handle it; can’t fight my own fights, gotta let mommy or big brother protect me and fight my fights. Remember, when seconds count, police are only minutes away. Police tactics have changed in the past 10-ish years regarding such “active shooter” situations, with current tactics understanding that the sooner the attacker/shooter/criminal is engaged the better. Old tactics were that the first officer on the scene needed to wait for backup then work to engage the situation, reasoning being that it would be suicide for a single officer to arrive and immediately engage. Now tactics are for the first officer on the scene to engage immediately, because doing otherwise only increases the body count of innocents. So, to minimize damage the first person on the scene needs to engage immediately. If there’s not a police officer right there right then, then who are the first people on the scene, and use a little logical extrapolation as to who can respond first.

 As for the more ordinary dangers you describe of female students walking across campus late at night, most campuses offer escort services where a public safety officer will accompany a student to her car or destination.

“Most.” So ok, what about those that don’t have such a luxury? What are they supposed to do? As well, must now there be enough public safety officers available for all the women on campus? What happens after a football game when you have a large flow of people, a need for general crowd control, but then a need by some to want to be accompanied to their car? How can such services feasibly be offered? What are those women supposed to do? Furthermore, is under the watchful eye of a public safety officer the only way a woman is supposed to move about? Ms. Bolton, I’m sure you yourself prefer to walk about in your daily life without having to have someone there watching over you all the time. Or if you do prefer that someone else tail and watch over you and be responsible for your personal safety, you must realize that not all of us are like that. I know a lot of liberated women that prefer to take care of themselves. Why would you deny your sisters that ability?

So Rep. Bolton, while I understand how you feel, I respectfully think you need to revisit your feelings on the matter… perhaps even setting your feelings aside and applying some thought to the matter.

On a home defense tool – part 4

/ hsoi / 11 Comments

If you haven’t read part 1, part 2, and part 3, please go read them before you read part 4.

 

Through the joys of blogging and “suggested links” I stumbled upon a 3-part home defense series from Caleb/Ahab. Here are links to his part 1, part 2, and part 3. These dovetail perfectly into where I left off in my part 3, that equipment is important, but skills and mindset are more important.

I took a fantastic training course called Street & Vehicle Tactics, from InSights Training Center. When gun people take gun classes they want to shoot guns! But this class had no shooting whatsoever. Yes there was a lot of physicality and moving about, but most of what was taught was about mindset and tactics — it was all about using your gray matter. The course talks about Priorities of Survival:

  1. Awareness and preparedness
  2. Tactics
  3. Skill
  4. Equipment

This list is in order, and notice that equipment is at the bottom of the list. This does show that equipment does matter: if you have unreliable equipment, ineffective equipment, it’s going to affect your chances of survival. What has a greater impact on your chances of survival tho are the other listed factors. In fact, there’s a level of “force multiplication” involved here. What this means is as you go up the priorities list, your chances of survival multiply. Equipment gives you the least multiplier, awareness/preparedness gives you the greatest and could even compensate for all the others. The items at the top of the priority list will take you much further than the items at the bottom, and the more/better you can have of all the items, all the better for your chances of survival.

Going back to Caleb’s articles, let’s look at parts 1 and 3. In his part 1 Caleb discusses some good first lines of defense: checking the outside of your home and setting it up defensively (trimming back bushes, well-lit, fences); minding your doors and windows (solid, locked); having an alarm system (deterrent, notification system); the utility of a purposely-trained big dog; other things such as flashlights and mobile phones. What is this? awareness and preparedness. It’s being aware of your home situation: these bushes block this ground-level window, this tree next to the house comes close to that second-story window, there’s a dark spot over by the trash cans. It’s preparing your home: let’s trim back that bush, let’s get those tree limbs trimmed back, let’s install some floodlights around the trash can area, let’s repair the fence for Fido’s sake.  

In his part 3, Caleb talks about “the plan”. He discusses thinking ahead of time about what to do in a home-invasion situation. What to do, where to go, what role each member of the household has in the event — including children, where boundaries are. What is this? This is preparedness, and tactics. He has made a plan, it was made ahead of time, it could be thought through, and practiced. He is prepared. He has discussed the tactics: he arms and hunkers down, Mrs. Caleb removes herself from the line of fire and uses the mobile phone to dial 911 and report everything. A simple plan, but the tactics are worked out head of time. 

In his part 2, Caleb does talk about equipment. While he and I have arrived at a different set of equipment, that’s the equipment that works for him, and he offers some interesting alternative suggestions. One thing I would add is to look around your home and see what could be used in a pinch. For instance, I have a Vaughan SuperBar which would make a pretty ugly weapon.

The take-home message from this part of my series? While we love tools and equipment because it’s fun, tangible, and we just like tinkering with and talking about cool gadgets, it’s really the least important part of home defense or any type of self-defense. Your mindset and mental conditioning are the most important thing, and the more you can invest there, the further you will go.