[GlockFanWA]

Originally Posted by LongGun1

Here is a tragic reminder of what happens when you are NOT willing to use deadly force when it is called for!

We don't know if Officer Dinkhetter was unwilling to use deadly force or if he was caught in a loop (mentally speaking). My take on this he was caught in a loop that he couldn't get his brain to break free from at all.

[UtahIrishman]

That video was very unsettling I turned off the sound half way through.

Everyone's capable but the trick is not only to be capable but to be ruthless about it.

I've only been in one situation in my life where my life was seriously threatened. Luckily the other guy didn't have the nerve to continue what he started. I think he knew it and that's why he ran.

I preferred that outcome, especially after the shaking stopped.

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by UtahIrishman

Everyone's capable but the trick is not only to be capable but to be ruthless about it.

Statistically speaking, this isn't true.


There's been a whole lot of research, and money spent by the .mil to figure out the best way to program soldiers to kill, and even then, they still haven't reached 100% yet.

[kirgi08]

A .gov program will not change a response ta a survival situation.Unless psych are involved.'08.

[TangoFoxtrot]

Q: If the SHTF will you be capable of Physical Violence against another?
A: Absolutely! Bottom line eat or be eaten.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by series1811

The closest thing I can think of to this issue is having your child molested. Early in my LE career, I had to work child molesting cases. Now, everyone pretty much says, and really thinks, they would kill anyone who molested their kids. I know I feel the same way.

Yet, out of all of the child molesting cases I worked, I only saw it happen one time. And, that was a mother, who within a few minutes of finding out, took a butcher knife and tried as hard as she could to stab her daughter's attacker to death. And, then, three months later, she was living with him again.

I saw a lot of people get really mad, but I never saw anyone else actually do anything.

But, you ask anybody, me included, and we all say we would kill the bastard.

I served on a GJ for 6 months and heard testimony on 500-600 cases. The demeanor of the GJ, including fairly liberal individuals, changed dramatically when the case involved a child. I could tell others (not you, since you've been exposed to it) stories that would just absolutely shock and horrify them.

Now would these people act on their emotions? Would they freeze part of the way through? All I can say is that I learned a long time ago that you cannot count on someone to behave as you think they would or should because when the rubber meets the road...that's truly the only test.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by DoctaGlockta

But for civilians these days some or quite possibly most have never really had to 'fight' someone or have physically injure someone on purpose.

Back in the day fist fights on the playground were common and that is how things got settled. However these days this is a no-no. Some may have never been in a real life physical confrontation before.

I can't even imagine a life where a person has never been in a fight. Guess what, if you first fight is for survival in a SHTF world with no law, you're not going to win, much less become Rambo. I don't care how many books you read or how many classes you take, If you ahev to ask the question, "am I capable of violence agaisnt another," you're not prepared and you won't survive.

This reminds me of that thread the other day with the gangsta guy's video. I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation.

[UneasyRider]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

Q: If the SHTF will you be capable of Physical Violence against another?
A: Absolutely! Bottom line eat or be eaten.

The law of the jungle will always exist in this way. We are very insulated in the U.S. at this time.

[quake]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

...Bottom line eat or be eaten.

Originally Posted by UneasyRider

The law of the jungle will always exist in this way. We are very insulated in the U.S. at this time.

Agree with both; just have concerns with the apparent belief by some that if you don't immediately turn into - and constantly remain - a predator, you automatically become prey. On the surface, it seems like a logical argument that you're one or the other, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that can think of people who went their entire lives as neither prey nor predator. I'd add a third option - protector. When I'm in uniform (heck, all the time), my default setting isn't 'predator' and it certainly isn't 'prey'; I'm a protector. Now, a circumstance may kick me temporarily into 'predator' mode, and honesty requires that I acknowledge that a bad enough circumstance can even plunge me into 'prey' mode. But that's a situational thing, not a constant state-of-living thing. Could be argued that since we're talking about shtf situations, that's inherent in the discussion; I just want to make sure that that's what we're talking about, and not the concept of "you either live as a predator or live as prey" on a macro, overall-life, level.

Some of the comments in these threads tend to sound as though they're from people that can't wait to "go predator" (a la gunkid), and some level of social collapse or disruption is seen as the license or opportunity to do so.

Originally Posted by UtahIrishman

...the trick is not only to be capable but to be ruthless about it.

Definite +1. Violence is hopefully a last resort, but it's sometimes a valid resort. But it's called 'violence', not 'debate'. See the dinkheller video for an awful example of the price of avoiding violence when violence is the logical, rational, and moral choice.

When violence is called for, it must be violent.

Originally Posted by Bren

...I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation.

Shame you feel that way, and that you see it in such a broad generalization. Is 'nice and decent' synonymous with 'weak and timid' to your way of thinking? Genuinely curious, because gentleness isn't weakness; true gentleness is controlled strength. A true weakling can't be gentle because lack of strength causes a lack of control. That's true in physical terms and psychological terms both.

[Lone Kimono]

Hopefully, I never have to find out. It's one thing to defend myself and another when my family is in danger. I don't consider it violence at that point...I consider it my duty to both my family and God who's entrusted them to me.

[UneasyRider]

My evolving thoughts are that a man would have to stay ahead of the curve when it comes to the use of violence to promote justice in a scenario with no law enforcement.

For example in a situation where a man says "Give me your back pack or I will kill you," you need to believe him and put 2 in the chest and one in the head.

The option is that while some guys would just be barking, many will be unleashed from the rule of law and ready to bite. If you do not take the lead you will end up dead, it's a numbers game. Again, this is only in a no rule of law, complete societal meltdown, your on your own scenario.

[Stevekozak]

Originally Posted by quake

Agree with both; just have concerns with the apparent belief by some that if you don't immediately turn into - and constantly remain - a predator, you automatically become prey. On the surface, it seems like a logical argument that you're one or the other, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that can think of people who went their entire lives as neither prey nor predator. I'd add a third option - protector. When I'm in uniform (heck, all the time), my default setting isn't 'predator' and it certainly isn't 'prey'; I'm a protector. Now, a circumstance may kick me temporarily into 'predator' mode, and honesty requires that I acknowledge that a bad enough circumstance can even plunge me into 'prey' mode. But that's a situational thing, not a constant state-of-living thing. Could be argued that since we're talking about shtf situations, that's inherent in the discussion; I just want to make sure that that's what we're talking about, and not the concept of "you either live as a predator or live as prey" on a macro, overall-life, level.

Some of the comments in these threads tend to sound as though they're from people that can't wait to "go predator" (a la gunkid), and some level of social collapse or disruption is seen as the license or opportunity to do so.



Definite +1. Violence is hopefully a last resort, but it's sometimes a valid resort. But it's called 'violence', not 'debate'. See the dinkheller video for an awful example of the price of avoiding violence when violence is the logical, rational, and moral choice.

When violence is called for, it must be violent.



Shame you feel that way, and that you see it in such a broad generalization. Is 'nice and decent' synonymous with 'weak and timid' to your way of thinking? Genuinely curious, because gentleness isn't weakness; true gentleness is controlled strength. A true weakling can't be gentle because lack of strength causes a lack of control. That's true in physical terms and psychological terms both.

Well reasoned and written posts! I agree with this thinking.

I have seen the other thinking in ppl for much of observing life. Those that think strength must be exhibited constantlhy through aggression of manner and behavior. The person that knows his strength and capabilites does not have a need to display them until the situation calls for it, and at that time, it is applied with no hesitation and no mercy. Knowing when that time is, is the key. These persons are a lot easier to live around than the former type.

[bdcochran]

"I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation."

I will tell you why I agree. 1968 US Army. One day I realized in a cold sweat that a younger emaciated guy on the other side with no education, but better eyesight and reactions could shoot me dead faster than I could react. And, the guys you would be going up against had probably been living in the field for years.

When a issue of M16s came in, they were first given out to the guys going right over to Vietnam. Then the tears started with the big, strong rah rah guys. Most of them had never been camping, been in the Boy Scouts, made a meal for themselves or knew the basics about first aid or personal hygiene.

When shtf in your community, your most difficult opponents will be guys who have basically lived the gang life for years. You will be their tuna fish and they will be the sharks.

There will be a lot of people going through a learning curve after shtf. You really don't want to be behind the curve or moralizing. You can get yourself up the food chain a bit if you work on your skills and physical health now.

Intellectual debates are worthless in my opinion.

[TangoFoxtrot]

Originally Posted by quake

Agree with both; just have concerns with the apparent belief by some that if you don't immediately turn into - and constantly remain - a predator, you automatically become prey. On the surface, it seems like a logical argument that you're one or the other, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that can think of people who went their entire lives as neither prey nor predator. I'd add a third option - protector. When I'm in uniform (heck, all the time), my default setting isn't 'predator' and it certainly isn't 'prey'; I'm a protector. Now, a circumstance may kick me temporarily into 'predator' mode, and honesty requires that I acknowledge that a bad enough circumstance can even plunge me into 'prey' mode. But that's a situational thing, not a constant state-of-living thing. Could be argued that since we're talking about shtf situations, that's inherent in the discussion; I just want to make sure that that's what we're talking about, and not the concept of "you either live as a predator or live as prey" on a macro, overall-life, level.

Some of the comments in these threads tend to sound as though they're from people that can't wait to "go predator" (a la gunkid), and some level of social collapse or disruption is seen as the license or opportunity to do so.



Definite +1. Violence is hopefully a last resort, but it's sometimes a valid resort. But it's called 'violence', not 'debate'. See the dinkheller video for an awful example of the price of avoiding violence when violence is the logical, rational, and moral choice.

When violence is called for, it must be violent.



Shame you feel that way, and that you see it in such a broad generalization. Is 'nice and decent' synonymous with 'weak and timid' to your way of thinking? Genuinely curious, because gentleness isn't weakness; true gentleness is controlled strength. A true weakling can't be gentle because lack of strength causes a lack of control. That's true in physical terms and psychological terms both.

My thought process is that if you can remain civilized and work with others in a crisis to get through it..fine. But you always must be ready to become the prediator if need be and do it with extreme conviction.

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by Bren

I can't even imagine a life where a person has never been in a fight. Guess what, if you first fight is for survival in a SHTF world with no law, you're not going to win, much less become Rambo. I don't care how many books you read or how many classes you take, If you ahev to ask the question, "am I capable of violence agaisnt another," you're not prepared and you won't survive.

This reminds me of that thread the other day with the gangsta guy's video. I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation.

The sheep do not understand how the wolf sees them.


Look know further than the "grey man" myth that they not only beleive, but perpetuate believing themselves to actually blend in.

[Stevekozak]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

The sheep do not understand how the wolf sees them.


Look know further than the "grey man" myth that they not only beleive, but perpetuate believing themselves to actually blend in.

While this is undoubtedly true, I suspect that there will be a number of wolves that get suprised by the sheep when they come to prey. What is that line from that movie "the greatest trick the Devil played on man was convinving them that he doesn't exist?"

[kirgi08]

Usual Suspects.'08.

[UtahIrishman]

Originally Posted by bdcochran

"I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation."

I will tell you why I agree. 1968 US Army. One day I realized in a cold sweat that a younger emaciated guy on the other side with no education, but better eyesight and reactions could shoot me dead faster than I could react. And, the guys you would be going up against had probably been living in the field for years.

When a issue of M16s came in, they were first given out to the guys going right over to Vietnam. Then the tears started with the big, strong rah rah guys. Most of them had never been camping, been in the Boy Scouts, made a meal for themselves or knew the basics about first aid or personal hygiene.

When shtf in your community, your most difficult opponents will be guys who have basically lived the gang life for years. You will be their tuna fish and they will be the sharks.

There will be a lot of people going through a learning curve after shtf. You really don't want to be behind the curve or moralizing. You can get yourself up the food chain a bit if you work on your skills and physical health now.

Intellectual debates are worthless in my opinion.

I've never been in the service so I can't speak from that point of view, but I have had experiences where I felt that cold sweat of fear that I might die.

I agree on not being behind the curve. But it's as much mental as it is physical. And thus I think some intellectual debate, ahead of time, can be useful. Otherwise why would we be posting here? Hopefully it's to help rather than brag.

I also think that everyone needs to experience being in severe danger at least once. I'm not talking about sky-diving or some other dangerous sport. You know the odds there are in your favor. Those are a calculated risk.

I'm talking more about situations in which you have no idea whether the outcome is going to be in your favor or not. Though hopefully the deck is stacked some with preparation.

I suppose the only way you can really prepare that way is to be a soldier a cop or a criminal. Since many of us aren't soldiers or cops and don't want to be criminals the preparation has to be mental.

I hope I'm making sense here. It's hard to articulate exactly what I'm driving at. It's kind of you've either seen the elephant or you haven't. But any preparation, both physical and mental, is better than nothing.

[Ruble Noon]

Originally Posted by Bren

I can't even imagine a life where a person has never been in a fight. Guess what, if you first fight is for survival in a SHTF world with no law, you're not going to win, much less become Rambo. I don't care how many books you read or how many classes you take, If you ahev to ask the question, "am I capable of violence agaisnt another," you're not prepared and you won't survive.

This reminds me of that thread the other day with the gangsta guy's video. I don't think the "survivalists" who post here have any idea how weak and timid they are, in comparison to the people who will be taking their food, guns, ammo, etc., in a SHTF situation.

I agree Bren. When the SHTF a lot of good people will perish during their first encounter with violence because they hesitate to act, afraid or unable to break out of that societal box that they are in.

[UneasyRider]

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

I agree Bren. When the SHTF a lot of good people will perish during their first encounter with violence because they hesitate to act, afraid or unable to break out of that societal box that they are in.

Very true!

[quake]

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

...When the SHTF a lot of good people will perish during their first encounter with violence because they hesitate to act, afraid or unable to break out of that societal box that they are in.

With that, I agree 100%. I don't at all disagree that some - likely many - will experience a horrible rude awakening when faced with true fear and violence for the first time. I just think it's a mistake to assume that all will; much as it's a mistake to assume that none will.

The laudable (and often tactically preferable) desire to avoid violence turns into self-endangerment if it's allowed to manifest as hesitation when faced with the need for violence.

That's what I meant earlier by the 'when violence is called for, it must be violent' comment.

[JuneyBooney]

First, soft tissue injuries hurt like hell. But getting shot in the bone is really painful. The problem with violence is that once you turn it on it is hard to stop. Learning a "controlled" response in any situation is critical to maintaining yourself.

[samuse]

I don't think that everyone is really capable of violence.

Technically they're physically able, but without a mental command to act, they are not capable.

There are different kinds of violence. Each needs to be studied and understood. One needs to able to recognize them.

I am a very non-violent, non-confrontational type of person. I'd like to think that I'm all macho and able to turn on a switch and be ruthless, but I'm not quite like that. I hope that training and mindset conditioning will allow me to act appropriately if the need arises.

[UneasyRider]

Originally Posted by JuneyBooney

First, soft tissue injuries hurt like hell. But getting shot in the bone is really painful. The problem with violence is that once you turn it on it is hard to stop. Learning a "controlled" response in any situation is critical to maintaining yourself.

There is a turning point in society when controlled will get you killed too. Not of course while there is still rule of law.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by UneasyRider

There is a turning point in society when controlled will get you killed too. Not of course while there is still rule of law.

When you look back in history, you see many examples of 'uncontrolled' that resulted in instilling fear in the enemy.