Discussion in 'Firearms' started by Tango3, Nov 10, 2011.
mea culpa Capt.;
I know ya'll are going to hate me for twisting this back toward the original topic but . . . well . . . I'm used to the hate. I'm a 1911 guy living in a Glock world.
I think there is an underestimated factor (in this particular case) that most folks don't honestly ask and answer that can make the biggest difference "should the worst actually happen".
I think it can best be described in the form of a question:
"Can I really shoot/kill/stop another human being?"
And I think that quite possibly getting an honest answer could be the hardest part of the whole "armed self defense" . . . thing.
If for no other reason than regardless of the answer we have to live with that answer.
I think that most everyone reading this will be saying to themselves right about now: "Well YEAH I can. If the circumstances are just right". We know that the with professional training folks realize that in a defensive scenario making that decision takes just about as much time as it takes to get killed. we MUST go into the situation with the decision already made. We MUST take the aggressive mindset that will allow us to shoot/kill/stop BEFORE the hand even reaches for the weapon.
Back to the question . . On one hand; if the honest answer we decide on is "NO", at least from the male perspective we are going to have ego issues. Of course we do not want to believe we just can't. We are strong willed men with countless generations of history telling us it is our DUTY to protect. But this is a case that I think we can all rationalize is a "you lie - you die" situation.
On the other side of that, we have the decision that we CAN. That has issues too. Religion, society, all that stuff tells us that shooting/killing/stopping is bad. If we do that - regardless of the circumstance we will somehow be stigmatized and possibly ostracized not only by society but maybe even by our own loved ones.
I think that we ALL play games with ourselves in regard to this question.
I'm not going to sit here and make the blanket statement :"that is a bad thing to do". But I am going to say that if you have not made a decision one way or another you better. And you better do it before "the worst" happens.
Those of you who have really been there know that there is no book one can read, no video one can watch, no lecture one can listen to that will prepare you for EITHER the act of actually ending another human or the aftermath of that action.
But there are some books that explain the physiological and physiological factors involved very well. Very well indeed. It is my opinion - and personal experience - that these are worth far more than their combined weight in gold because they give us real, and accurate insight into these areas, and thus information we can utilize to make informed decisions before our butts - or more importantly; the butts of our loved ones - are on the line for real.
1) "Leadership and Training For The Fight - A few thoughts on leadership and training from a former special operations soldier"
Written by: MSG Paul R. Howe. US ARMY Retired.
ISBN# 1-420-8951-6 (e)
ISBN# 1-420-8950-8 (sc)
2) "Sharpening The Warrior's edge - The Psychology & Science of Training"
Written by: Bruce K. Siddle
3) "On Killing - The psychological cost of learning to kill in war and society"
- And -
3a) "On Combat - The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace"
Written by: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
#3 - ISBN# 978-0-316-04093-8 (revised edition)
Hell I can make the choice of "To pull the trigger or not" a whole lot simpler for you guys....
here's a web site that lists tens of thousands of people who wished someone had pulled the trigger...
The National Organization of Parents Of Murdered Children, Inc. For the families and friends of those who have died by violence. (POMC)
Opinionated, I agree. Wholeheartedly. A training series I have participated in - Target Focus Training - dovetails neatly into this, it is about attitude and mindset:
That is the very first paragraph. Humans not only have a capacity for violence, we have a God given instinct for violence. Civilized modern society has done it's damnedest to have us all suppress that capacity, and bury that instinct. Those who seek violence as a resolution to all circumstances, and I have known a few in my day, are exceptionally dangerous and evil. This is because the violence sits quietly under the veneer of civility and explodes into action with complete and total unpredictability. I treat all strangers as if they are exactly like this. I am civil. I am polite. However, I will fight and kill. I will not like it, but I will deal with the guilt and pain that comes after. I know that I will, because I do.
You, me, all of us, must be ready well in advance to take a human life. A big caveat here. You must always keep in mind that your potential assailant wants nothing less than to kill you and kill your loved ones. Every stranger, even in today's "lawful" society must be viewed as a potential assailant. Any hesitation will likely cost you or a loved one their life. I am not advocating all out mindless aggression and violence. The people who deal in that are the ones we will, in a SHTF/WROL scenario have to deal with more often than not, IMO.
I am saying, just like Opinionated, you must have already accepted, in your mind and heart that you will, you must, kill or be killed. That means facing a potential threat in a SHTF/WROL scenario with weapons hot and in hand.
My family and my group has a "stranger" protocol for a SHTF/WROL circumstance. Every person who approaches our location or persons is treated as an armed hostile, even if they are not carrying a visible weapon or seem to be alone. We will avoid all conflict we can, but we will not be caught unprepared when it comes to us uninvited.
On a side note, I am a devout Christian, and no single place in the Bible does the Word state killing in self defense is wrong. Quite the opposite. Jesus himself charged the 11 Apostles (Judas had betrayed Jesus at this time) to buy a sword, even if they had to sell their coats. Even though he later rebuked them for attacking the ones who came to arrest him, He was not saying do not defend yourself. He was stating that this attack, specifically Peter attacking an unarmed man was without cause, was sinful. He stated very implicitly he must fulfill his destiny - "'Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?" John 18-11.
From a wonderful Christian essay regarding Biblical self defense (excerpts follow, I suggest all Christians read this):
I am not a pacifist Christian. I am a servant of the Lord of Hosts, and I have a moral and ethical duty to my Lord to serve and protect my family and loved ones from evil. Even to the point of killing an aggressor for to not do so is a sin and a moral failing. It is indeed "evil by omission". The total pacifistic movement that has infiltrated the Church is, IMO, a tool of evil, aimed at weakening Christians, making them more the victims and easier to destroy. More and more "Eastern" philosophies slowly creep their way into Christianity. Noted and well regarded Theologians have been swayed by this "can't we all just get along" attitude. I say we can, without sacrificing our Christian values, morals, and our Heavenly charge to protect the weak, defend the helpless, and remain peaceful with peaceful people.
Separate names with a comma.