Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Self defense is multi faceted

Last night I read a fantastic blog  - The multidimensional paradigms of self defense by Erik Kodo.  This morning I was listening to “Davis and Emmer” on the radio.  Emmer was running his mouth about a shooting that happened recently in Minneapolis. 
Emmer’s ignorance compelled me to share the good information from Kodo’s blog.

Before we get much further let me state a few things:
  • I’m a huge supporter of concealed carry.  I believe citizens should be armed
  • I’m not second guessing the witness / shooter
  • I will give him the benefit of the doubt
  • This blog isn’t so much about the specifics of the case, but about the discussion on the radio show. 
  • Good information on self defense has to get out to the public.
  • I wasn’t there, and the media isn’t a good source for facts
Here is a link to the news story on the shooting
MINNEAPOLIS - Minneapolis police say a man who shot and killed an armed robber who was attacking a woman has been released.
Officers detained the man for questioning following the fatal shooting of the 23-year-old robber Thursday night. Authorities say the armed robber confronted the woman in the parking lot of a Cubs Food store, took her purse and hit her in the head with his gun. A man who witnessed the robbery chased the suspect and shot him behind a nearby restaurant during a confrontation. When police arrived, the witness told officers he had a permit to carry a gun, shot the armed robbery suspect and told officers where they could find his handgun. He was detained for questioning.
Investigators say they found the robber's gun near where the shooting took place.
(Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
That is all the information that was publicly available at the time of the radio show.
So, to break it down witness saw a woman being assaulted and robbed.  Robber ran away.  Witness chased him.  Confrontation ensued.  Witness shoots the robber
Here are some of the things that Emmer was saying that pissed me off:
Emmer – Oh, so we should let bad things happen?  Should he call time out while he calls 911
Davis – But the issue is that he chassed him
Emmer – Of course he should have chased him.  We don’t know what he knew at the time.  He doesn’t know if he has a gun or not.  Guess what bad guy I’m armed too, good night.
To me, it’s not only what Emmer was saying, but the way he was saying it.  Through his tone he came off as an arrogant ass clown, acting as an expert with out any solid information on use of force law.
Self defense is defined as protecting yourself from death or great bodily harm (permanent injury / maiming).  In order for self defense to be justified you must have IMOP
I – Intent
M – Means
O – Opportunity
P – Preclusion
When the witness saw the initial assault robbery IMOP was clearly there.  The Robber showed intent by actually committing the assault, he had the means -  23 year old male with a gun vs. an elderly woman, he had the opportunity  - at night in a parking lot.  One could even make the argument against preclusion because if the witness left the victim may have been further injured or killed.  Had the witness / shooter acted then force would have been justified.  However, when the robber fled, the victim was no longer in danger.  The Robber no longer had opportunity, and he showed lack of intent by fleeing.  How are you protecting yourself or others by chasing him?  Police have a duty to peruse, to prevent possible harm to the public.  When a civilian chases someone after the danger has passed they have violated preclusion.  With out IMOP force is unjustified 
Emmer doesn’t know use of force law.  His statements were very emotionally driven.  Of course the good guy should chase down the bad guy and bring him to justice.  If this causes a situation in which lethal force is used  - oh well “good night”
Emmer’s view on self defense is very one dimensional.  Which brings me back to Erik Kodo’s blog The multidimensional paradigms of self defense.
THE MULTI DIMENSIONAL PARADIGMS OF SELF-DEFENSE
The Multi Dimensional Paradigms of Self-Defense is a model that describes a person’s overall view of the universe self-defense. Everyone’s viewpoint is different, but viewpoints can still be categorized in groups. The MDP model helps explain the basic differences in viewpoints. It provides people a framework to expand and evolve their self-defense paradigm into one with a more comprehensive viewpoint.



HOW THE MULTI DIMENSIONAL PARADIGM BENEFITS YOU

"A journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step" - Lao-tzu

And that is how most people start learning self-defense, they just start stepping with no idea where they are actually going.

A journey of 1000 miles actually needs to begin with a road map. The
Multi Dimensional Paradigms of Self-Defense is a "map" for the journey of learning and applying self-defense.

This journey has many forks, dead ends, and bad roads in the form of incomplete, inaccurate, and missing information.

The journey is made even more hazardous by the existence of the multiple Paradigms that self-defense experts, martial arts instructors, law enforcement, and security professionals use to promote and teach their personal view of self-defense.

These Paradigms are more than just aspects of self-defense. They are viewpoints that carry with them certain pre-conceived "truths" about what is fact and what is fiction. Unwavering belief in these "truths" create the foundation of the Paradigm and allow the Paradigm to exist without modification or evolving into a more comprehensive viewpoint.

Steadfast believers in their Paradigm will deny and refute any and all information that conflicts with their "truths". Conflicting information or evidence threatens the "reality" of their Paradigm and are therefore ignored or attacked as "untrue".

DIMENSIONS ARE NOT PARADIGMS

Dimensions on the other hand are not viewpoints. They are aspects or elements. These aspects are combined with the "truths" to create the Paradigms. Unlike a Paradigm, belief in one Dimension does not automatically conflict with belief in another Dimension. For example, you can believe in the existence of the color red and the color blue. But, if you believe that there is only red, then there cannot be blue.


The Dimensions are combined with the "truths" and become the foundation of the Paradigms.

THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXAMPLE OF A PARADIGM VIEWPOINT

In response to how women should defend themselves from sexual assault:

“Just teach women how to kill quickly. It's that simple. Who's going to convict a woman of killing her attacker?” - Self professed "expert" with 20 years experience of personal protection, physical security and martial arts.

This "Expert" exists and promotes the 1 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense.

a. He has no need for the 2nd Dimension of Avoidance because he believes, you can "just kill your attacker".

b. He needs to deny the 3rd Dimension of Psychology and Physiology in order to make killing something anyone can easily do.

c. He needs to deny the 4th Dimension of Law and Ethics in order to promote killing without legal consequence.

d. There is no need for the 5th Dimension of Violence Dynamics when the issue
as simple as "good" vs. "evil".

e. There is no need for the 6th Dimension of Societal Violence Dynamics if you believe that everyone in society supports your actions.

THE MULTI DIMENSIONAL PARADIGMS OF SELF-DEFENSE MODEL WILL ALLOW YOU TO EVOLVE AND TO EXPAND YOUR VIEWPOINT OF SELF-DEFENSE.

Think self-defense is simple and clear cut? Marc MacYoung shows you how complicated it is: Reality vs. Actuality
Self-Defense Explained
1 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense


1 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense- This viewpoint is that self-defense is a physical confrontation between the “bad” attacker and the “good” defender. The depends upon using physical skills to defeat the attacker. The attacker is known to be bad because of his actions, or because he attacks first.

1st Dimension of Self-Defense focuses on all concepts that relate to physical combative skills, methods, and training.

More on the 1st Dimensional Paradigm
2 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense


2 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense - This viewpoint acknowledges that physical defense may sometimes fail. Therefore, it is necessary to use situational awareness to avoid a potential confrontation. If avoidance fails, physical defense is applied. This paradigm also defines a “bad” attacker and a “good” defender.

2 Dimension of Self-Defense focuses on all conventional threat assessment, situational awareness, and avoidance concepts.

More on the 2nd Dimensional Paradigm
3 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense



3 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense - This viewpoint builds upon the 1st and 2nd Dimensions and acknowledges that awareness and physical defense is greatly affected by the psychological and physiological responses of the combatants.

Therefore, awareness and physical defense training must include aspects that address these issues. This paradigm also defines a “bad” attacker and a good “defender”.

3rd Dimension of Self-Defense - focuses on all of the psychological, physiological, and behavioral aspects of self-defense such as scenario and adrenal stress training.

More on the 3rd Dimensional Paradigm
4 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense



4 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense - This viewpoint acknowledges that there are legal and ethical considerations for physical defense. It acknowledges that confrontations are not necessarily black and white with a well defined “bad” attacker and a “good” defender. There are in fact gray areas to be considered.

This viewpoint also acknowledges that sometimes physical defense requires using extreme force, and or/ pre-emptive attacks in order to defeat an opponent.

This paradigm also takes into consideration all of the aspects of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Dimensions.

4th Dimension of Self-Defense - focuses on all Use of Force, Rules of Engagement,
legal, and ethical considerations of self-defense.

More on the 4th Dimensional Paradigm.
5 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense



5 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense - This viewpoint acknowledges that violence is complex issue. It is comprised of both social violence and asocial violence with large gray areas between the relative “good” and “bad” of the combatants.

This paradigm acknowledges that the driving intent and motivation of an aggressor has a great deal to due with how the aggressor is ultimately dealt with. That threat assessments, strategic, tactical, and physical responses are influenced by the specific violence dynamics of the confrontation.

5th Dimension of Self-Defense - focuses on the violence dynamics of confrontations. It incorporates these aspects of violence dynamics into all of the other four dimensions.
6 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense



6 Dimensional Paradigm of Self-Defense - This viewpoint acknowledges that not only is violence comprised of the actions of the individuals involved, it is also colored by the social agendas, bias, prejudices, and conceptions of society.

This paradigm acknowledges that a person’s and societies' view and interpretation of acts of violence can be differ widely depending upon the individual’s personal agenda and the norms and social bias of different cultures. This viewpoint also takes into consideration the concepts and aspects of the other 5 Dimensions.

6th Dimension of Self-Defense - focuses on the societal dynamics of violence. It also incorporates these aspects into all of the other five dimensions.

More on the 6th Dimensional Paradigm
More on the 1st Dimensional Paradigm
When most people think of self-defense, they tend to think of the 1st Dimension. The majority of self-defense training focuses on the 1st Dimension. It is the most concrete aspect of self-defense. It is centered around physical skills.

These physical skills are usually taught as systems. The most popular of these systems are formal martial arts styles such as karate, jujitsu, TKD, etc. But a system can also be an informal collection of techniques and concepts that put together by an individual instructor. The basic premise behind the 1st Dimension is to develop your physical skills to such a degree that in the event you are assaulted you will be able to physically prevent harm to yourself and others.

The underlying assumptions or “truths” that support the 1st Dimensional Paradigm are as follows:

1. Self-defense involves a well defined “bad” attacker that physically assaults you without justification.
2. Defeating the attacker is simply a matter of executing the proper physical techniques.
3. The attacker is known to be “an attacker” because he can either be easily identified as “evil” or he initiates the physical assault.

The popularity of the 1st Dimensional Paradigm comes from its simplicity. You are good, the attacker is bad, and self-defense will always achieved upon execution of the proper techniques. Self-defense begins with the physical attack and ends with the attacker being defeated. This Paradigm is appealing because self-defense mastery is an obtainable goal. Just as you can learn to swim and thus not drown if you fall in the water, you can learn self-defense and always be safe.
More on the 2nd Dimensional Paradigm
The 2nd Dimension focuses on developing your situational awareness to such a level that you are able to identify potentially dangerous people and situations and thus stay away from them.

Here is an article that expands upon situational awareness in terms of the Cooper Color Codes.
States of Awareness, the Cooper Color Codes

Cultivating Awareness

The 2nd Dimensional Paradigm is an expansion of the 1st DP. It acknowledges that there are instances where the best way to defeat your attacker is to avoid a physical confrontation in the first place. For example, if you realize that there are certain people who you cannot defeat with your 1st Dimensional skills, then you must avoid them in order to stay safe.

The underlying assumptions or “truths” that support the 2nd Dimensional Paradigm are as follows:

1. Self-defense involves a well defined “bad” attacker that wants to physically assaults you without justification.
2. The attacker is known to be “an attacker” because due to your execution of situational awareness, he can either be easily identified as “evil” before he initiates the physical assault.
3. Defeating the attacker is simply a matter of avoiding him.

The 2nd DP is an evolving viewpoint, but it is still harmonious with the 1st DP. Because, in the event that avoidance might fail or it is not possible to avoid the attacker, you can rely on your 1st Dimensional skills to defeat him.

Similar to the 1st DP, the popularity of the 2nd Dimensional Paradigm comes from its simplicity. You are good, the attacker is bad, and self-defense will always achieved upon execution of the proper techniques of situational awareness and/or physical skills. Self-defense begins with the identifying the potential attacker and ends with the attacker being avoided or defeated.

In the 1st DP, self-defense is ALL about you and your abilities. In the 2nd DP, self-defense is mostly about you, .i.e. your ability to detect and avoid and/or your ability physical defeat. The variable of the other person's abilities is introduced, but it is managed by your actions.

As with the 1st DP, this Paradigm is appealing because self-defense mastery is an obtainable goal. Not only can you learn to swim and thus not drown if you fall in the water, you can also avoid dangerous water in the first place.

Here is Marc MacYoung on:
Avoidance
The Five Stages of Violent Crime
More on the 3rd Dimensional Paradigm
The 3rd Dimensional focuses on the psychological, psychological, and behavioral aspects of self-defense. These aspects are complicated, but nobody explains them better than Lt. Col Dave Grossman.

Why can’t Johnny kill?: the psychology and physiology of interpersonal combat

We now have a situation where there is direct conflict between the 3rd Dimension and the 1st Dimensional Paradigm. Remember, the "expert" who said "Just teach women to kill..."? Grossman is telling us in effect that the majority of human beings don't want to kill each other.

On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs

The 3rd Dimension now casts doubt on both the ability of the defender to execute all of his physical skills under stress, and the willingness of the defender to injure or kill the attacker in the manner simulated in training.

Therefore, the 3rd Dimensional Paradigm adds some modifications to the "truths" of the earlier Paradigms in order to rectify this conflict.

1. The skills of the 1st Dimension must be "gross motor skills" as opposed to "fine motor skills".
2. Psychological conditioning style training commonly thought of as "Reality Based Self-Defense" is introduced as the method to instill the desire and willingness to physically defend yourself.

Similar to the 2nd Dimensional Paradigm:

3. The attacker is defined as "bad", and the "defender is defined as "good".
4. The attacker is easily identified by either situational awareness or his aggressive actions.
5. Self-defense begins with the identification of the aggressor and/or his avoidance or physical defeat.

The 3rd Dimensional Paradigm is an evolving viewpoint that points out deficiencies in the earlier Paradigms. It attempts to resolve these deficiencies with a different style of training. Therefore, in many respects the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Dimensional Paradigms are compatable.

Richard Dimitri talks about Behavioral Protective Offense.

Here is Marc MacYoung on:

a. The Adrenal Stress Response to Crisis.
b. Chemical Baths, Neural Pathways, Monkey and Lizard Brains
c. Mental Preparation
More on the 4th Dimension Paradigm
The 4th Dimension of Self-Defense involves both the legal considerations of self-defense and the ethical issues that arise.

Brandon Oto provides a detailed tutorial on Use of Force in the United States.

Massad Ayoob on Avoiding Legal Traps.

These issues call into question the viability of the lower Paradigms. Much of the popularity of the lower Paradigms comes from their simplicity. You are good and the aggressor is bad. The aggressor attacks you, and you rightfully defend yourself. As a result, there are neither legal consequences, nor moral or ethical issues to contend with.

The 4th Dimensional Paradigm brings with it the complication that even though you believe that you are good and the attacker is bad, you may have to prove it in court. And even if you do prove it on a legal basis, there are also ethical issues to be considered.

Therefore, the 4rd Dimensional Paradigm adds even more modifications to the "truths" of the earlier Paradigms.

1. The aggressor is no longer pre-defined as "bad" and the defender as "good". The definition now resides in the hands of the Court and legal system after the fact.

2. The use of the physical skills of the 1st Dimension are now called into question. To escape criminal and civil penalties, their use must be legally justified.

3. Self-defense may require pre-emptive actions in order to succeed. Waiting to be attacked first may be fatal.

As a result of these "truths", the 2nd Dimensional aspects of Awareness and Avoidance becomes much more important. The very real negative consequences of engaging in the physical actions of the 1st Dimension makes the avoidance of confrontation more important.

The 4th Dimensional Paradigm is evolves self-defense from the simplicity and certainty of the 1st Dimensional Paradigm to the complexity and uncertainty of having to deal with the consequences of one's actions. These consequences have a very real impact on a person's ability and willingness to execute the physical skills obtained through 1st Dimensional training.

David Nerbovig on the ethical considerations of self-defense and martial arts training.

Recent Work on the Ethics of Self-Defense by Tyler Doggett.

Here is Marc MacYoung on:
Legal
Going to Jail For Defending Yourself
The Cost of Winning
More on the 5th Dimension Paradigm
The 5th Dimension of Self-Defense focuses on the violence dynamics of confrontations. The 5th Dimension expands upon violence as being either Social Violence or Asocial Violence, and in some cases, a combination of the two.

In the lower Paradigms, the causes violence and the intent of the aggressor are immaterial. An attack is an attack. All violence for the most part is assumed to be Asocial. But, a closer examination reveals that most violence is in fact Social in nature, and is used to obtain Social goals.

Asocial violence is less common, but predatorial in nature.

Here is Rory Miller on Social and Asocial Violence.

Violence Dynamics and More About Violence Dynamics

Tim Larkin on Social Confrontation vs Asocial Violence:

- Part 1
- Part 2
- Part 3

MacYoung on Kinds of Violence.

The 5th Dimension Paradigm further complicates the issue of self-defense because it brings new aspects to consider.

The 1st aspect is that if you are engaging in Social Violence, then you are an active participant in the confrontation. Thus you share some responsibility for it's creation and outcome.

The 2nd aspect is that if you are targeted for Asocial violence, then what you know about Social violence will not help you. In fact, it is highly disadvantageous to bring Social violence "rules" to a Asocial violence situation.

The 3rd aspect is that if your 1st Dimensional physical skills are designed for Social Violence, than using them in a Asocial Violence situation can lead to your demise.

The 5th Dimensional Paradigm illustrates that understanding why a person is exhibiting aggression towards you is paramount to determining how the aggression is ultimately handled.
More on the 6th Dimensional Paradigm
6th Dimension of Self-Defense focuses on the societal dynamics of violence. Self-defense now becomes part of the larger picture of societal views and beliefs. There are no absolute definitions of "good" and "bad", it is a matter of what society or some part of society deems to be "good" or "bad".

Individual actions are judged and interpreted in the context of larger societal dynamics such as Hate Crimes, Victim Blaming, Youth Violence, Domestic Violence, Date Rape, etc.

The 6th Dimensional Paradigm is filled with ambiguity, misunderstanding, and miscommunication. Here is an example of how people's perceptions differ in regard to date rape: The Havens 'Where Is Your Line?'

Much of the controversy that revolves around victim blaming arises from confusing the 2nd Dimension concept of Risk Reduction with the 6th Dimensional concept of Threat Reduction.
Victim Blaming, Threats, and Risks
Paradigm Pitfalls - Dead Ends, Loops, and Wrong Turns


Train hard, Train smart, Be safe and....self defense is multi faceted

15 comments:

  1. Awesome comments!! More people need to hear/ read and take to heart.
    Too many vigilante wannabees

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good discussion and I'm not saying anything you present is wrong but there are a couple of other things that need to go into the analysis. "Citizens arrest" is a valid concept, well supported in common law and statutory law (though the specifics differ jurisdiction to jurisdiction). Also, while almost never discussed as such, "Defense of others" is also a valid legal principle. Sure there are some practical concerns to deal with and there are stricter legal standards then for "self-defense" (most notably under "defense of others" there has to be an actual threat not just a reasonable belief) but these are both valid and relevant here. By discussing the comments only under an analysis of "self-defense" law you're leaving out a big piece of the law as it applies here.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There is a glitch that keeps Kasey from posting response so he asked me to cut and paste his response.

    KASEY-
    "629.37 WHEN A PRIVATE PERSON MAY MAKE AN ARREST.
    A private person may arrest another:
    (1) for a public offense committed or attempted in the arresting person's presence;
    (2) when the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in the arresting person's
    presence; or
    (3) when a felony has in fact been committed, and the arresting person has reasonable cause
    for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    629.39 REQUIRING PRIVATE PERSON MAKING ARREST TO DELIVER ARRESTEE
    TO JUDGE OR PEACE OFFICER.
    A private person who arrests another for a public offense shall take the arrested person before
    a judge or to a peace officer without unnecessary delay. If a person arrested escapes, the person
    from whose custody the person has escaped may immediately pursue and retake the escapee, at
    any time and in any place in the state. For that purpose, the pursuer may break open any door
    or window of a dwelling house if the pursuer informs the escapee of the intent to arrest the
    escapee and the pursuer is refused admittance.

    Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. Is the citizen catching the robber more important than the citizen’s or even the robber’s life?

    My advice is, do what needs to be done to protect yourself and others from harm. Once the immediate threat has passed be an excellent witness and let the Police do their thing "

    ReplyDelete
  4. "My advice..."

    Reasonable people can disagree; I happen to think the world would be a better place if people were more willing to help others, even at risk to themselves, rather then less.

    More importantly in this context though is that if we are going to have this discussion we need to at least acknowledge that is legally permissible rather then write it off as, 'hey, look, not self- defense' (which is technically true but overlooks these other, highly relevant concerns).

    ReplyDelete
  5. I totally agree with you that people should help each other more and look the other way less....if someone's life is in danger.
    But to fight over material possession is dumb and dangerous.... and nothing more than a monkey dance over who is right and who is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So, Lisa (Kacey ?), I should let those around me steal my life and time. If I save up and buy something it has my blood and sweat in it, that I will never get back and will have to spend more of to replace, if i give it away at the girdt sign of violence. So, is SD just doing what ever you can not to use violence?

    Just a thought,
    Josh

    ReplyDelete
  7. Question why is it only the police have a duty to act?

    ..........?

    I'm reading Paradigms looks interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is Kasey's response (still having trouble posting)

    Josh K
    So, Lisa (Kacey ?), I should let those around me steal my life and time.

    No – Do everything you can to protect yourself. You have to decide if you want to use force to protect property. Self defense law doesn’t cover force used to protect property in most states.

    If I save up and buy something it has my blood and sweat in it, that I will never get back and will have to spend more of to replace, if i give it away at the girdt sign of violence.

    Yes, you will have to spend more money to replace. But things can be replaced. Your life can’t be replaced. Anytime you engage in violence, there is the potential for things to escalate to the lethal force level. You have to choose if what ever is being taken form you is worth your life, or in this case the life of the robber

    So, is SD just doing what ever you can not to use violence?
    No, self defense is about ending violent confrontations as safely and quickly as possible. Doing what you can to avoid violence, however is an extremely effective strategy that sadly is rarely taught.


    Question why is it only the police have a duty to act?

    Hmmmm, I think I can best answer this with the use of a story. Let’s say for example you are walking down the street. 5 men in body armor and automatic weapons burst through the doors of a bank and start shoot randomly shooting. Would it make sense if the law required you to intervene with a duty to act? Or would the public be better served running to safety and providing professional Law Enforcement with quality real time intelligence?

    Having a concealed carry permit gives you permission to carry an effective SELF DEFENSE tool with you. It doesn’t make you a cop, Batman, or Jack Bauer anymore than having a garden hose makes you a fire fighter.

    Don’t get me wrong, do what ever you have to do to get home safely to your loved ones. Don’t let others be harmed, do what is just - fear nothing.

    Just understand that if you are no longer protecting yourself or others and you cause / force a confrontation to effect a citizens arrest, you not only risk losing the protection self defense laws (your actions are now assault) but you risk your life and the life of others for what….a purse?

    You have to do what you feel is right. Just ask yourself is it worth it?

    I’d imagine that if anyone reading this saw someone hit by a car would do everything they could to help them. They would call 911 and provide any 1st aid they could. No one would try to do field surgery there in the street because the felt it was the right thing to do and more people need to help each other. They would leave surgery to a professional. Having a permit to carry a scalpel doesn’t make you a surgeon. Having a permit to carry a gun doesn’t make you a professional law enforcement officer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kacey -

    This is a what if.

    In stituation above, if the guy had let him run away, and the armed robber, thats already committed a felony, panics in his rush to excape carjacks and kills the driver of the first car he comes across, would we still be questiong his motives and judgement? You know there would be those going why didn't he stop hom when he had a chance.

    The vigilante comment kind of pissed me off.

    Let us not play second guess the man on the ground, and also your fellow officers did have a problem with it.

    Sometimes I get the feeling the cops want us unarmed and helpless... You say I have the right to defend myself, but my first responce should be to run away and call the cops.... The "professionals" that you complaind don't do enough traing on their own. Having a gun and a badge does make you a cop ether, and having special police training doesn't guaranty perfect out comes.

    You seem to be under the impression that those who go through all the hassle to get a CHL do it just wander around looking for badguys to shoot. That they are un able or unwilling to take the time to become profecient in the use of their chosen tool. To learn the law and to put in the time to learn how to use it safely.

    Hmmm..... rant over.
    Take care and be safe out there.
    :-)
    Josh

    ReplyDelete
  10. Correction -

    "Let us not play second guess the man on the ground, and also your fellow officers didn't have a problem with it."

    ReplyDelete
  11. From the time you are born to the time you die you only have so much time/life.

    How much of your life did you give up to be able to afford the watch on your wrist? How many hours of work did you put in to be able to have a couple of hundred dollars in your wallet? That's also how much life and time you will have to give up to replace it. That's time that you could be spending with your loved ones.

    Anytime you give up your life to another, because of a threat of force makes you a slave to them.

    Yes, if you give them your stuf they might not end your life, but they are stilling it.

    My 2 cents,
    Josh

    ReplyDelete
  12. "No – Do everything you can to protect yourself. You have to decide if you want to use force to protect property. Self defense law doesn’t cover force used to protect property in most states." - Kacey

    That's why I live in Texas.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Hmmmm, I think I can best answer this with the use of a story. Let’s say for example you are walking down the street. 5 men in body armor and automatic weapons burst through the doors of a bank and start shoot randomly shooting. Would it make sense if the law required you to intervene with a duty to act? Or would the public be better served running to safety and providing professional Law Enforcement with quality real time intelligence?" - Kacey

    Randomly Shooting or already engaging cops on scene; which would be more likely. If their engaging cops, secure weapon (as to not become a casualty of freindly fire) and direct people to safety. There are already people calling why tie up the lines anymore.

    If they are randomly shooting then we have a Mumbai situation and I seek cover and engage as to try to give cover for other to escape. Again no calling as others will be doing that as thats what you have them trained to do. I will not go down with out a fight.

    No Virginia Tech or Oslo for me.

    After saying all that, what will probable happen is I will piss myself and crawl onto a little ball.

    ;-)
    Josh

    ReplyDelete
  14. Haven't had time to post but have been following the discussion a bit. Lots of interesting stuff here.

    First, at least we are getting closer to a discussion of what's relevant rather then just sweeping discussion away by saying'not self defense'.

    Here's the thing- yes there is some level of risk in apprehending criminals.The question then needs to be asked is there a benefit and do the risks outweigh the benefits. And I really don't see any of that discussion occurring.

    I also find it telling that in the 'car accident' hypothetical Kasey leaps to arresting someone as being more comparable to *surgery* then first aid. Really,surgery?

    And of course both these are the same category of ing- that of rendering medical assistance. It's just that sometimes nothing more then a little common sense and a willingness to help are needed and sometimes you need the absolute best training and state of the art equipment and of course the vast majority of the time you are dealing with somewhere in the middle.

    We all like to think that what we do is special but I have to say that the 'surgery' analogy comes across a bit like,"Lo, mere mortal, thou shalt never comprehend the specialness of what *I* do". When really, it's not THAT big of deal. And then there is the question of what is the 'proffesional' response? Let's face it, cops aren't out there solving a high percentage of property crime-where I live I doubt I would even talk to someone dire fly,they'd make a report for insurance and compile it into the statistics and that would be that. So,umm, we're supposed to stay out of the way for that? (although in fairness to cops everywhere the police here are, if not particularly lacking in competence, certainly the least motivated I've ever seen, most places aren't *so* bad)

    ReplyDelete