«-- Letter Re: Choosing a State for Relocation | Main | Letter Re: Lack of Large Animal Vets Even in Rural Areas--Be Prepared to Do It Yourself --»
Three Letters Re: Use of Force in Retreat Security--Planning for Rules of Engagement
Note from JWR: The discussion of use of force in retreat
security (and "Less Than Lethal" means) has elicited large number of e-mails
from readers. For the sake of brevity, and since so many letters covered the
same ground, the following are just three of them. The first of these is from
"FerFAL". He is SurvivalBlog's volunteer correspondent in Argentina.
Hi James,
I’m glad to see that you are advising people to have non
lethal weapons [in addition to guns] and (when the situation allows it) deterrent
approaches when dealing with trespassers.
Some situations require immediate lethal action, but that does not mean you’ll
never require non lethal solutions on occasions. Life isn’t always black
and white. On the contrary, most of the time it’s a plethora of shades
of gray.
This is awful common in these parts, I’ve often seen people fire warning
shots, fired a few myself on occasions when visiting my friend’s farm.
On one occasion it was just kids stealing some fire wood. A few .22 LR shots
sent
them away.
Not long ago we saw some poachers well within my friend’s land, too close
to the house. I shot a couple of .44 Magnum rounds and they got the message,
changed direction immediately.
People, as James warns, this is a last resort, or almost last resort alterative.
Be careful of the legal consequences! Over here it is common practice but it’s
still serious business, be ready to explain the cause for such action.
I keep a couple of Less Than Lethal rubber pellet 12 ga shells in my Mossberg's
500 stock shell holder, ready in case I need a Less Than Lethal alternative.
As you explain, it portrays
you as a humane person that cared enough to at least have the non lethal alternative,
even if lethal action was required afterwards.
Another word of caution, "Less Than Lethal" 12 ga ammo [such
as rubber pellets and beanbag rounds] can be
lethal. The one I have is military ammo designed for riots and clearly states
that it can
be lethal if shot directly
at the target at less than 10 meters.
The knock down power of these rounds, even against healthy, robust adults is
pretty impressive.
God bless you and your family during these special days, take care. - FerFAL
Dear Jim:
As a proud 10Cent Challenge subscriber, I know that the recent subject of Levels
of Force could be argued back and forth for a long time. What may help all
your subscribers and readers are articles on the defensive use of firearms
by Massad Ayoob. I found them at FindArticles.com, for example, and any internet
search should come up with them. He gives excellent practical advice on gun
situations, what to do, not do, as well as what to say and not say. The reader
in Maine who fired a warning shot would know this is never done by law enforcement,
too much liability. If one is involved in a shooting, tell law enforcement
something like "...I was afraid for my life (or another's) and had to
fire my weapon to save a life, I want to clear this up as much as you do but
I need to speak to an attorney first..." and then SHUT UP,
which is exactly what they would do in the same circumstance.
People need to know the use of a gun is serious, life is not a movie, and shooting
people, even those that deserve it, is not glorious. Folks will come back and
get revenge, either with a civil or criminal complaint or violent ambush at
a later date.
Living here close to the Mexican border, being once mugged at knife point by
three illegal aliens (for $1.30 in my pocket), working all hours in these mean
streets, I have never had to pull a gun on anyone, thank goodness, and survived
many altercations none the worse for wear. My job with the power company for
the last 30 years has me on occasion cut electrical service for non-payment
at the pole or junction box when the tech's cannot cut it at the meter because
of access, dogs, etc. Having encountered angry biker gangs, meth labs, and
all other sorts of bad people and bad situations, the use of a gun has always
been kept as a last resort. My truck has reverse to get away from most problems
and luckily I'm paid by the hour and not by how much work I do. (-:
The point is pulling a gun will get you in a lot of trouble, shooting a warning
shot will get you arrested, shooting someone may very well cost you everything
you have worked for up to now in your life. Your home, retreat, guns, food
reserves, retirement account, everything. I would definitely shoot if my life
or another's life were in danger, but that is indeed very rare and most situations
can be avoided with a little education, forethought and by setting aside one's
ego. Take Care and God Bless. - Cactus Jim
James;
I'm assuming that many patrons of this blog who read and digested the
two letters referred to in the subject line have never served on active duty
in
a combat arms branch and/or never served as a law enforcement officer. Because
of those two letters, many are possibly over thinking self defense reactions
to would be criminals/trespassers/thieves? The effect on law abiding citizens
who choose to possess firearms for defense is that they subconsciously and
automatically hesitate to defend themselves because of all the legal discussion
and, 'it happened to me' type cautionary statements. Police officers are guilty
of the same thing because of legal double talk (i.e: I don't want to get sued
so I better wait as long as possible to ...a real disaster for us cops since
it's either our lives or possible jail time). In order to clear the air, as
I believe many readers are confused and probably have reached out to the closest
friend or co-worker they trust for clarification. What and when to do something
is not complicated. I hope to eliminate the ubiquitous 'what if' in so many
people's minds (including cops, former military who have returned to civilian
living).
OBTW: I have been serving as a law enforcement officer for 18 years, and I
served five years active duty with the US Army. Most of my army experience
was as
an Airborne Ranger and served in the Middle East for 13 months. No, I don't
know
everything
about
the subject but have spent the majority of my working life considering all
these issues pre 9-11 and post-9-11.
1. The cops are not your friends (see: letter by Gary B in Maine who shot off
a warning shot with a 12 gauge). Cops are for one thing: to prosecute you.
That's it. They are resources for the state's attorney, period. Sure, the other
guy may be guilty, but until proven guilty, you are right there with bad guy
facing charges involving firearms. Not good, especially with so many anti-Second
Amendment types in office. So, in such scenarios, do you spill your guts to
the first
cop who shows up while other guy tells lies because as a criminal
he knows what to say?
2. If you are threatened, you're threatened. What else is there to know? (a
threat is a situation where you 'feared for your life or feared serious bodily
injury'. Using lethal force because somebody stole/attempted to steal your
XYZ isn't justification for lethal force. However, read on...). If
threatened,
then immediately go to the next level and take care of business at that level.
Make sure you can articulate that you were threatened. If
in doubt as to how to articulate that, just do an Internet search engine on
lethal force. As an
18 year officer, I tell you that if someone refuses to obey a legal and clear
command to do something, they are resisting (and they know it). Because a subject
resists, I know that I am permitted to take it to the next level. Said bad
guy will continue to resist until you do something about it. If you don't do
something that gives you the upper hand, he's got the upper hand. Better to
maintain the upper hand and act from that position versus from the other. Waiting
spells potential disaster. As a citizen just trying to protect themselves and
their retreat, if it comes to that, it isn't any different. In my mind the
big difference is if you/me were in a survival times situation, are you really
expecting some cops to respond? They'll probably be more concerned with their
own property, family, neighborhood, garden plot, et cetera.
3. The more training you have, the more your confidence will rise.
4. Sending your dogs after an intruder(s) who have entered your property is
stupid. If your dogs were trained for such things, the intruders wouldn't have
intruded. Sending an aggressive untrained barking dog into the the field/yard
where you feel intruders pose a threat (a real threat, after all, you have
the guns, night vision, IR floodlights, ....) is an great way to get them killed.
If the dogs barked while they were in the house, you were alerted. So why send
them out? They did their job, [now] you do yours. If you have trained dogs
in protection (and related skills), that's a different scenario. Most people
don't have that kind of dog. If bad guy kills one or all of your dogs, now
you have a less
secure retreat than you did before. The only 'threat' to fear,
is the one who poses a 'real threat'. He'll take those dogs out if they aren't
trained to threaten him. - Flhspete
