Joined
·
2,192 Posts
I was thinking earlier (I know...I probably shouldn't do that :biggrin2: ) about our philosophy on self-defense. It seems that most of us feel that our weapons are a last resort, something we deploy only after we've exhausted other options for dealing with the situation (OC, empty-hand, etc.).
Is this really the way we ought to approach the situation? Let me explain where I'm going with this and y'all tell me what you think.
Let's assume that we are involved in a situation where we are in danger of suffering from serious injury or death. This could be because we have been "ambushed" by someone waiting for a victim to come along. It could also be because we failed to properly handle the "interview" stage of the confrontation (or they guy just isn't going to back down despite our best efforts) and now the perp has succeeded in closing range and is now close enough to do us harm. Either way, we are dealing with a situation in which we have been chosen as the victim of a violent crime (robbery, rape, kidnapping, etc.) These situations do NOT include bar-fights or other "stupid" situations where we are mutual-combatants.
So here's the question: In a situation like the examples I gave, should we try to run all the way up the "force continuum" (I hate that term) from least dangerous to most dangerous, or should we immediately respond with the most effective tools at our disposal?
My thinking is that in a situation where we (or someone we're protecting) are in danger of being seriously injured or killed; we should respond immediately with overwhelming force. For example, let's say I've been approached by someone using one of the common ruses/techniques to get close ("hey buddy, you have the time, etc.). I do all the stuff I'm supposed to do: verbal-tactics, defensive posture, etc. and he continues to approach. At this point, he's demonstrated that he has illegal intentions.
My response at this point would be to immediately access my firearm. Depending on the exact situation and preceding events, I might only obtain my firing grip (showing him that I'm armed and giving him one last chance to disengage); I might go ahead and draw. Either way, I'm not going to waste time with "less-lethal" methods when I've got a articulable threat to my safety/life. I am proficient in empty-hand fighting and defensive/offensive knife use. However, I see these skills only as ways to either buy me time to access my most effective weapon--my firearm, or as methods that I can use if for some reason I was unarmed or unable to access my firearm. Regardless, I'm going to employ the methods that will allow me to neutralize the threat in the most efficient manner possible.
Hopefully some of my rambling made sense.
Any thoughts?
Is this really the way we ought to approach the situation? Let me explain where I'm going with this and y'all tell me what you think.
Let's assume that we are involved in a situation where we are in danger of suffering from serious injury or death. This could be because we have been "ambushed" by someone waiting for a victim to come along. It could also be because we failed to properly handle the "interview" stage of the confrontation (or they guy just isn't going to back down despite our best efforts) and now the perp has succeeded in closing range and is now close enough to do us harm. Either way, we are dealing with a situation in which we have been chosen as the victim of a violent crime (robbery, rape, kidnapping, etc.) These situations do NOT include bar-fights or other "stupid" situations where we are mutual-combatants.
So here's the question: In a situation like the examples I gave, should we try to run all the way up the "force continuum" (I hate that term) from least dangerous to most dangerous, or should we immediately respond with the most effective tools at our disposal?
My thinking is that in a situation where we (or someone we're protecting) are in danger of being seriously injured or killed; we should respond immediately with overwhelming force. For example, let's say I've been approached by someone using one of the common ruses/techniques to get close ("hey buddy, you have the time, etc.). I do all the stuff I'm supposed to do: verbal-tactics, defensive posture, etc. and he continues to approach. At this point, he's demonstrated that he has illegal intentions.
My response at this point would be to immediately access my firearm. Depending on the exact situation and preceding events, I might only obtain my firing grip (showing him that I'm armed and giving him one last chance to disengage); I might go ahead and draw. Either way, I'm not going to waste time with "less-lethal" methods when I've got a articulable threat to my safety/life. I am proficient in empty-hand fighting and defensive/offensive knife use. However, I see these skills only as ways to either buy me time to access my most effective weapon--my firearm, or as methods that I can use if for some reason I was unarmed or unable to access my firearm. Regardless, I'm going to employ the methods that will allow me to neutralize the threat in the most efficient manner possible.
Hopefully some of my rambling made sense.
Any thoughts?