First let’s talk about Open Carry because cool kids are talking about it. I remember a while back reading about a California open carry story about a group of people cleaning a public beach while carrying. Overall it was a good story, but for one little detail. One of the guys had his gun (unloaded per Cali, bullshit law) his magazines (naturally, no point in packing a pistol without ammo) and HANDCUFFS. Seriously? Now I won’t say there will NEVER be an instance where a civilian might need a pair of cuffs. But those instances are SUPER DUPER slim, and overall a private citizen’s reason for carry is simply to keep themselves and others alive until the cops can show up. If cops were always around to protect me maybe I wouldn’t feel the need to own guns for protection. Then again if cops were around to protect me, we’d be living in a Police state, and likely I’d be typing this on my phone from the cattle car…
Now there’s the talk of the people lugging around long-guns in urban situations. Now we all know handguns suck, and long guns are superior implements for self-defense. In one of the early Vicious Circles various people were discussing hypothetical rifle carry. Now if a disaster happened and 911 was a busy signal, and the Police are either preoccupied, or non-existent (or the enemy), I’d probably prefer to have my FAL or my Mossberg 590 on me with a 1911 as a backup. But on my given day where I am leaving home expecting not need a gun, but knowing that nothing in certain, and my life is worth it, I pack a 1911. Why? Well I like it, and I’m good with one. I like .45 ACP and I think its as good as you can hope from a pistol, and its comfortable and easy to carry. That last bit is most important. To carry a rifle around you either need to sling it across your back where you won’t be able to get to it in a hurry, or slung in a more tactical position where you’ll likely need a hand to steady it, and therefore a hand you won’t have free. Sorry, just not worth it, I’m not leaving my home looking for a fight, if it wasn’t a legal nightmare here I might keep a gun in my truck to fall back to, but not slung. Say what you will, but it just isn’t likely enough to be worth the trouble.
OK all that was to get to this discussion. Sebastian has been following the Gerald Ung shooting case. I’ll first up say I have not been following the case outside of Sebastian’s blog, and I’m certainly looking forward to his interview on NRA news, and I will repost the youtube file here.
From what I gather from Sebastian (and I overall trust his judgment when it comes to reporting details) but Mr. Ung had been out drinking and ended up offending somebody enough to get him and his buddies threatening to attack him. Ung Retreated, and only when he was on his back did he draw his pistol and shoot. Also I guess he put 6 .380s into the jerk before he went down. What got me onto this topic was this bit:
This case does, however, show the risk inherent in using deadly force. That is a big reason I am a strong advocate of carrying less than lethal force in addition to lethal force. It gives you more options, and will ultimately make you look far more sympathetic to a prosecutor and jury if you had exhausted all reasonable options available to you before resorting to deadly force.
I think my point can simply be made by this case, if Ung had pulled a can of OC or a stun device he might be dead, because he certainly wouldn’t have had time to pull the .380, and no matter how much you belittle the .380 ACP, 6 of them ALWAYS trumps a less-lethal device in fight-stopping power.
Now back to my point about the handcuffs. In my no-at-all-humble opinion, less lethal items like batons, OC spray, and stun devices are tools for law enforcement, not civilians. Where they come in handy are the not-uncommon situation where some jerk is causing a stir that warrants an arrest, and while they aren’t willing to go peacefully, they also aren’t posing a deadly threat to anybody at the exact moment.
This is when the cops hose them down with OC spray, and cuff them and haul them off.
This is when YOU are walking away, and keeping your eye on the threat until the threat goes away, you get away, or the fight escalates.
We have a little back-and-forth, talking about various scenarios, each getting more specific than the next.
But without mind reading there is no clear answer. Does this guy just want to blacken my eye to please his ego, or is he going to beat my head into the curb? Does he have a knife in his pocket that he’s going to pull if I fight back? Will his buddies pull him back, or join in? Is the guy just posturing, and will OC convince him to kill me?
Without mind reading I can’t say what would be better, OC or a gun. Also without mind reading a jury won’t know either. Sorry, there’s no “Eureka” moment here.
What I will say is I’m not going to crowd my tool box, because when my mind and pulse are racing I don’t want to decide between the pepper spray, and the gun…and be wrong.
Overall I’m going to be walking away. I’m going to talk as much as I can to de-escalate the situation. I’d rather be thought a pussy and a coward than to shoot somebody. If somebody is still interested in attacking me, I have little choice to assume they are not in it for an ego stroke, and I am in danger. If I pull my gun and the fight continues that’s time for deadly force.
We can go back-and-forth, on would-a-should-a, but you start getting into realms where you are now talking about carrying a rifle with you in case you are attacked by MS13 gang-bangers, or ChiCom paratroopers with automatic weapons and body armor.
Most of the time that pepper spray is going to be just something you lug around, just like your gun. But only one of those items are more likely to save your life, and Sebastian illustrates a case where if a man carries pepper spray he might have been killed.
Jury talk is just conjecture, each case has its own merits. I’ve even heard people say that carrying pepperspray might get you in MORE trouble because the prosecution could paint you as bloodthirsty if you reached for your gun first…but I suspect that is as valid as the fabled handloads for self defense discussion.
Overall I’ll say leave the pepper spray to the cops, and carry your gun, because if you can’t walk away from a threat, that is a SERIOUS threat.
Now I won’t say there will NEVER be an instance where a civilian might need a pair of cuffs.
I can think of quite a few instances, but they’re not generally things you’re going to be doing in public…
Fuck! Sometimes with these long posts I set out to say a bunch of things, but I always miss a bunch!
I totally missed the handcuffs sexual inuendo! Shame on me!
Mike beat me to it…LOL, but I do agree, if you ‘overload’ yourself, you actually have a much longer decision tree, and more chance(s) to end up on the wrong end if you make the wrong choice. I don’t carry pepper spray for that reason. And yes, if you can’t get away, it IS a serious threat to be handled accordingly.
Fight or flight – those are the options for a confrontation. Everything else is frippery.
I don’t know what evil lurks in the hearts of men, nor what they keep in their pocketses. Less-than-lethal methods do not provide enough guarantee of incapacity of their targets to do additional harm. If I’m not justified in using deadly force, I’m not justified in using ANY force, and vice versa.
Did you totally mix a Lamont Cranston and Smegol quote? My g33k heart is a FLUTTER! 😉
That’s my thought, I am a VERY non violent person, and I really don’t find violence becoming. It should be (and frankly CAN be) avoided at all costs. That being said it takes two willing parties to have peace, only one to have war. If I’m not fully capable of returning violence when I have no other choice, I’m likely a dead man.
I really like your “If I’m not justified in using deadly force, I’m not justified in using ANY force, and vice versa.”
I may have to use that in the future!
Having taken a snootful of OC, I will never rely on it for anything other than seasoning.
A handgun is less than lethal.
While I agree with the notion that LTL devices are more distraction than useful to most non-police confrontations, I do think the basic idea of possessing LTL skills to augment your gun skills is a valid and under-considered concept. I train in Krav Maga for largely this very reason (the particular discipline training available in your area will likely be the deciding factor for most; that said I endorse Krav Maga over alternatives if at all possible). In addition to the general gains attainable from physical training, KM is specifically designed to incorporate modern weapon (read: firearm specifically) defense/offense as part of the basic discipline. Knowing how to deflect an attack long enough to deploy a weapon from concealment (or taken from an attacker – a routine “gun defense” technique)alters one’s mindset when confronted, allowing the confidence to take additional time to employ alternative tactics like calling for assistence or distancing from the attackers.
As far as trying to pre-empt the jury’s perception, any action taken that can be credably depicted as “gaming the legal system” by a prosecutor seems counterproductive.
Martial arts are actually totally OK, and good things to know. You will ALWAYS be carrying your hands and feet, so why not learn to use them. Same goes for making various medical supplies out of articles of clothing, or knowing a tampon can plug a puncture (or bullet) wound. These are things you’ll have with you, and in a pinch they can be used for alternate uses.
A gun is just going to be used for a gun. Sure you can hammer a nail into a board with a 1911’s slide, but how smart is that? A can of OC spray, or a Stun gun are ONLY good for those things, so you will ONLY be reaching for those things in certain scenarios. And as Ian says above, one doesn’t want to grab the wrong one and die because of it.
I saw a similar discussion to this on SIGFORUM once. I feel that pulling my 1911 is also a fail. I escape with my life, but there are financial and legal consequences that I really don’t want, TYVM. I am not a cop. I have no need to put down suppressive fire, I have no need to confront, and if I can escape, I sure has Hell will.
I sometimes wonder if we gunnies take the sheepdog metaphor too far.
In discussion, and in bravado (Like people Open Carrying with Handcuffs, ASP batons, or those dipshit “Conceal Carry Badges”), but I haven’t heard much in terms of actual vigilante behavior, or people making citizen’s arrests.
Actually I read about people who “Patrol” and make citizen’s arrests, and almost all of them never carry guns (and are lucky to not get shot)
Still one must acknowledge the appeal to being a hero and saving lives, but its not our job, and if any of us become a hero it will just be from pure dumb luck.
I dont get the whole sheepdog thing. I carry to protect my ass. If I see something go down, I would be pretty had pressed to get involved in it- unless it was exceptionally egregious.
I have zero sympathy for J.Clueless Public. They too could carry for their own good, but if they CHOOSE not to, then why does it become my burden to protect their tails when they are not able to ?
I’m of two minds of this, with a boatload of caveats. Maybe a blog post is in order.
The issue is, Less than Lethal (LtL) devices are designed to -subdue- an attacker or otherwise physically resistive person. Once said person is subdued, what do you do? As the law enforcement angle has already been brought up, let’s examine the LtL tools available to your standard officer.
First, and most common, is the baton. Many of us are familiar with the Collapsible Straight/Steel Batons (CSBs) and the formerly ubiquitous PR-24, still used in riot control and some departments. But the truth is, any stick can be substituted, if it is of sufficient length and heft. These batons and CSBs may be LtL, but they are NOT “non-lethal.” Strike someone in the head or neck, and you can kill a person rather more easily than one might suppose. Strike in a “non-lethal” area, and you can still deal some significant damage, i.e., strikes to the knees, stomach, elbows, etc. The person you are attempting to subdue WILL most likely require medical attention, if for no other reason than to cover your own butt should they later sue you for “unnecessary injury.” In fact, while they ARE “less lethal” than a firearm, batons and sticks aren’t terribly “non lethal.” Witness all the “Gun Death” stories Weerd has linked where someone was beaten to death. But let’s suppose you use a baton or stick, and subdue your attacker. Were you justified in the usage? Remember, LEOs have a “Use of Force Continuum,” wherein something is judged “justifiable” or “non-justifiable.” Have you been trained in this? Are you attempting to defend yourself, or take your attacker into custody? All this will be figured in by the grand jury. And remember, if your attacker is sufficiently large and/or doped-up, he may well be able to take severe injury, ignore the pain, and grab your baton. For a CSB or baton to have sufficient “oomph” to do anything, it’s gotta have sufficient length, which gives Joe Thug something to grab. Now he has a weapon, and the situation is most DEFINITELY at a “deadly force” level. Remember that “less-lethal” does not equal “non-lethal”? The only think keeping your attacker from NOT hitting YOU in the head is his own self-control, and if he’s angry / drugged enough to ignore YOUR strikes, I’d not count on this.
Second, the pepper spray / OC spray which is the topic of this discussion. Let me say that OC is NOT 100% effective. While some people (like myself) are severely incapacitated by it, others (whom I witnessed first-hand) are able to simply wipe their eyes, squint a little, and continue with business. And if YOU are like me, severely affected by the effects of OC, you’ve just contaminated yourself with the stuff and put yourself in a position of disadvantage. If you’re close enough to use OC, you’re close enough for your attacker to get that OC on YOU. Can you fight through the pain/blindness/difficulty breathing?
And again, if it DOES work, are you prepared/trained to take him into custody and deal with any potential medical issues that may arise? You’ve subdued your attacker, he is now YOUR responsibility until the police and/or EMS arrives.
Tasers. A very effective tool for subduing someone and taking them into custody. But they’re very “one-person use” devices. Does your attacker have buddies? What if you miss? What if he’s wearing heavy clothing and the barbs from the probes don’t penetrate to his skin? And if it works, and he goes down, and has no friends nearby to help him, are you prepared to stand there over him, re-zapping him every time he tries to get back up, until the cops arrive or your battery drains? An average person will likely not want to fight after getting hit once with the taser, but what if he’s Doper Drug-Head? You might need the rest of your battery.
Other devices do exist, such as shotguns loaded with bean-bag rounds, the FN-303 Lawdog mentioned in one VC (admittedly an awesome tool), and such, but all are rather more difficult to conceal than a CSB, OC spray, or a taser, essentially consisting of a specialty long-arm. And all of them deliver at the least some sort of heavy impact akin to a bullet hitting home, if with less kinetic energy, and all have rather serious potential to be QUITE lethal at “social encounter” range.
So, each device has its own problems and limitations. CSBs and batons can kill, and can under wrong situations can give your attacker a weapon, necessitating your shooting them anyway. OC spray doesn’t always work, and can affect you as well, sometimes as badly or worse than your attacker, depending on your own sensitivity to it. Tasers require your staying with your attacker and hoping he has no helpful buddies nearby (who, if they attack, you may end up shooting anyway, as your taser’s already been used). Other devices are large, unwieldy, hard to conceal, and have a minimum safe distance, of which you’re not guaranteed to have the luxury. And ALL of these devices are designed to subdue an attacker in preparation for taking him into custody.
Are you trained in cuffing? Are you willing to stay with your attacker? Are you willing to try devices until -something- works? Are you trained and prepared in rendering first aid for the results of each tool? And most importantly, SHOULD THIS BE YOUR PRIORITY?
Off-duty, I carry a gun. I leave my OC and baton at home. I do not carry a shotgun loaded with beanbags, and there is no FN-303 slung under my trench-coat. Off-duty, I’m just another Joe Q. Citizen, like anyone else, going about his business, and wanting some means of personal defense; I’m NOT going to be seeking out troublemakers and thugs with the intent of stopping crimes in progress, or taking criminals to jail. The tools of my job stay with my job; I am not going to put myself in further danger of death or serious bodily injury off-duty. If a situation requires force, it WILL be a deadly-force scenario, or none at all.
Don’t get me wrong, I have NO problem WHATSOEVER with Joe Q. Citizen carrying alternate means of self-defense. But I STRONGLY recommend that anyone who chooses to carry LtL devices KNOW the potential consequences of each device, what to do if things go wrong, what to do if things go right, and to be prepared to shoot the sorry bastard anyway if the device doesn’t work as intended. LtL tools are NOT designed for this purpose. A good 1911, or Glock, or firearm-of-your-preference IS. In short, while I DEFINITELY support the RIGHT to carry LtL devices, I also STRONGLY recommend AGAINST it. If that’s ALL you have, then most definitely USE it, but you are not being paid to take someone into custody; your responsibility is to PROTECT life and limb of yourself and your family, NOT to “bring your attacker to justice.”
So think, “What is my responsibility? What are the consequences? IS THIS WORTH IT?” If you are justified in shooting/killing your attacker, WHY would you put yourself in further danger by merely attempting to subdue him, which attempt may very well fail and necessitate deadly force anyways? Choose your self-defense tools accordingly.
Kermit
WOW Kermit, you don’t post often, but when you do you knock my socks off! Thanks for all that information, I 100% agree!
Heheheh… There’s a reason I don’t post often, Weerd… I have to “build up” for a while, so I don’t dribble off at the mouth.
Speaking of dribbling, do you know if there’s going to be a VC tomorrow? I’m in a sort of withdrawal from new doses of intellectual conversation interspersed with drunken rants and horrified “Oh My God NO!” exclamations. 😛
haven’t heard yet, but I’ll let y’all know!
Pingback: Weer'd World » Sheepdog
Pingback: Weer'd World » How About Me?
I’m fine with LtLs for cops. But situations in which laymen find themselves are pretty much divided up entirely between those which do not justify the use of force, and those which justify the use of any level of force available. I will not pull out _any_ weapon in a situation under which I would not consider myself justified in killing the aggressor. And if I _am_ justified in killing him, then I fully intend to have the appropriate tool for the job handy. With luck, brandishing a weapon will be enough to end the aggression. If not, then I may not have enough time and freedom of action to escalate force levels gradually.
I 100% agree!
Cops sometimes have to round up uncooperative, but not deadly criminals, they need LtL to aid them, and for those applications they work VERY well.
For civilians YOU ARE NOT A COP, you should not be keeping the peace. You should be minding your own business and safety and if you are in danger you should WALK away, if you are unable to safely walk away you are in a lethal force situation.
Pingback: More on Martial Arts | Weer'd World