To Arms!by
William Crosby Prentice
The title of this essay could be either a call to action, or a toast to weapons. Either way, the purpose is to discuss the decision of whether or not, and to what extent, a person should be armed. The author is biased in favor of being as heavily armed as is legal under any given circumstances, and has a hard time coming up with reasons for not being armed. The Right of Self Defense I would bet that nearly all of those that regularly visit SurvivalBlog will agree that a person has a natural right, independent of and senior to any legal system, to defend his life and property. This audience would also tend to agree that this right extends to defending others who are under an attack that could result in their loss of life or sustaining great bodily injury. The perversion by government of the self-defense right, and the attempt by governments to create a monopoly on the use of force, is at the root of our problems with government. There are many governments, such as that of New Zealand, that do not recognize a right of self defense. The United Nations also has trouble with that concept. The assertion by governments of a monopoly on use of force and denying it to individuals, and the use of that force to coerce obedience, to seize property, and to take lives, is perhaps the greatest of all evils. Denying that individuals have the right of self-defense is an amazing thing, but you hear "civilized" people make that argument all the time. Once you have been conditioned to think that the right to self defense is even debatable, you might find yourself also debating whether or not you should even consider arming yourself to do so. If you are worrying about whether or not you should or can arm yourself, then this essay is aimed at you.
Weapons Humans have big brains, and are bipedal, so that they can maximize the use of "tools." A review of the scientific literature makes it clear that "tools" is a PC alternative to the word "weapons." Humans are hard-wired to use weapons, and being interested in perfecting that ability does not make you uncivilized, it makes you more human. Being disarmed makes you a slave rather than a citizen, a human beast of burden, who differs from a plow-horse only in that a human slave is also a "tax-payer." Many people have an innate abhorrence of weapons, and regard any act consistent with owning or using a weapon to be inexcusable. Weapons guru Jeff Cooper coined the term "hoplophobic" to describe them. The views of such people are ignored in this paper, because such irrational sentiments are of no interest to evolved humans who believe in individual freedom and personal responsibility. (Note: I am often seized by a perverse desire to see the onset of a TEOTWAWKI event because hoplophobes and their progeny will be among the first to succumb, greatly benefiting the species.) To defend your life and property you have to be willing to fight, and fighting involves weapons. The array of weapons ranges from the natural weapons of the human body that martial artists seek to develop, to the group-served weapons and machines fielded by modern armies. It would be nice to live on a nuclear powered aircraft carrier and use it for your personal protection, or to have a fleet of armed drones at your disposal to eliminate your enemies, but that would mean enslaving millions of tax-payers and forcing them to pay for it. Let's take a look at what is possible and effective for the individual to use for his own defense and those of his family or tribe. Threat Assessment
A professional security assessment, whether involving the geopolitical strategy of a superpower or the defense of a small antimony mine in the ungoverned regions of Honduras, is built around the definition and analysis of a threat. As in all strategic exercises, we begin not with what we think we know, but with the right questions, which in this context would include:
Security assessments for major commercial facilities in dangerous environments are often substantial documents requiring hundreds of man-hours from a diverse group of experts to compile. For our purposes, the model can be condensed into a shorthand form that, with practice, can be effectively applied to any situation. Let's look at a few situations: Wild Animal Attack – This can include mountain biking in Orange County, where lions have attempted to feast on bikers, or the backpacker entering grizzly country in Yellowstone, or the older couple taking their grandchildren to the local park where a pair of pit bulls is running amok (don't freak – I like pit bulls, grizzlies and cougars!). The probability of such an attack is normally small, but indeterminate; an attack might be avoided or deterred depending on the circumstances (aggressively resisting a mildly hungry cougar) or avoided with timely local intel (avoiding a recent grizzly kill noted on a map for you by a ranger). If you can't rely on avoidance/deterrence, then I prefer a large-caliber rifle (my 500 A-Square works great on cape buffalo), but that isn't usually convenient and might not be legal, so a large-caliber pistol is the most practical defense most of the time. Evolution of the threat isn't a consideration - you aren't likely to shoot a grizzly to death one day and find another one wearing Kevlar the next. Muggers – The most commonly portrayed self-defense situation is that of a person innocently going about their business in public and being robbed, assaulted, or jacked. Again, you might be targeted or randomly selected, and although avoidance/deterrence is possible, it can't be depended upon. The self-defense handgun you train with most regularly is the right weapon to carry here, but if it is illegal to carry a pistol, and you chose to refrain from doing so, then by all means equip yourself with the appropriate number of knives and a sturdy walking stick. Threat evolution is a factor - muggers learn to avoid people who might be carrying, and might also focus on gun-free zones.
Home Invasion, Burglary – When you are sitting at home, or lying in bed, you probably feel pretty safe, and you might be, particularly if you have a good security system, which should include dogs and guns. On the other hand, if it were possible to determine all of the independent variables, you could decide that you are more likely to suffer an attack at home than you are out and about. The safest approach here is to have firearms strategically located around the house, with appropriate measures in force to prevent misuse by children or incompetent adults. If you carry concealed during the day, then why not continue to do so after you get home? Unlawful LEO Activity – What if you are assaulted by law enforcement acting outside the law. I have many friends in law enforcement, who are just as upset about these incidents as we are. If you think this is uncommon, then check out these web sites: here, and here. Note also a disturbing recent report that certain jurisdictions hard-pressed in the current economic environment might use drug sniffing dogs and the right to property forfeiture to increase public revenues. I am not a lawyer, but according to my research, there is a common law right to use force (but not lethal force) to physically resist improper police actions. As noted at The Volokh Conspiracy, a recent Michigan case reaffirmed that right, while earlier Indiana rulings first negated then reinstated that right. If you are the victim of such an incident, but are not in mortal danger, then it may be best to ensure there are lots of witnesses and lawyer-up later on. If your life is in danger, then in my own mind a deadly assault under color of authority is the same as any other assault or home invasion. Abduction – Imagine you have been abducted, beaten, sexually abused, and awaken to find yourself bound and gagged in the trunk of a moving car. This is as bad as it gets. There are those out there that would advocate continued cooperation, but I would argue that you are probably only alive because it is more convenient to kill you somewhere else. I would also argue that cooperation is not consistent with pay-back. If you are tied up, get loose, and root around in the trunk until you find a weapon – something like a tire iron. Even if there is nothing that serves as a weapon, as soon as that trunk pops open your job is to kill your attacker(s) with whatever you have available. What have you go to lose?
Active Shooter – The recent Aurora, Colorado, active shooter case produced an amazing storm of blog activity. Some people pointed out that a single armed citizen sitting in the theater could have saved the day, and others dismissed that idea, ignoring the fact that something along those lines had really happened in 2007, where an armed citizen killed a shooter in a Colorado Springs church before he could get revved up. Apparently the theater is a gun-free zone, so if you armed yourself and went to the movies, and someone saw your pistol, you would have to leave and apologize, or explain to the local police that you didn't see the sign. Even if you are only armed with a knife and/or a walking stick, if you are close enough you are just as dangerous as the shooter is, and the closer you are the less you have to lose since he will probably shoot you anyway. The active-shooter threat has evolved – they always seem to select gun-free zones to attack. Military Attack – I can't ignore this one. Let's say you have joined the Army, gone through your training, and have been assigned to a unit being deployed to Pick-a-Stan, and that you are not a combat veteran. First of all, you should hunt down the individuals within the unit, particularly senior NCOs, who have been there and know what they are doing – stay close to them and learn everything you can. Also, augment your EDC gear in meaningful ways, and ensure your issue weapons are not flawed. Get tight with your fire team and talk about what is going to happen, and what has been happening, every day. If you have incompetent leadership that is intent on getting you killed, discuss it with your team and figure out what to do. In combat it is inevitable that people will be killed, but who gets killed is a function of training and circumstance; take your training seriously and become the most competent fighter you can be. Don't become a victim of circumstance. Stay in shape, stay sober, stay alert, stay alive. The Point – As you can see from the truncated threat analyses above, I can't think of a single strategic/survival situation where you wouldn't be better off carrying, and using, the most powerful weapon that you can use effectively and are legally entitled to carry. Maybe you could avoid bloodshed by giving a mugger your wallet, but if that is the course you select, why not do so while retreating slowly gun in hand? The grizzly in front of you might just be startled, and maybe you can act submissive and creep away, but why not do that while holding your 454 Casull at the ready? It may be more comfortable on the couch if you take your Kimber out of your waistband and put it upstairs unloaded, but why not just loosen your belt a little and leave it on until you go to bed?
Firearms If you have made the decision that arming yourself is a good idea, then let's jump right to firearms, because firearms are the most effective personal defense tool you can have. Volumes have been written on the best self-defense weapon, and you can devote the rest of your life to research in that area, so just let me say this about "which" firearm: The best firearm for defending yourself is the most powerful weapon you can legally possess and use well, and which is in your hand at the time that you need it. There are several subordinate points to that main rule, including:
September 18, 2012 Copyright © 2012 Survival Blog
|
