16 Rules for the gunman All very true


PDA






lostone1413
April 14, 2012, 03:18 PM
Suarez International Group Of Companies
13 APRIL 2012

Rules For The Gunman


1). Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man.

2). Always carry your gun regardless of social pressures

3). If you can't physically carry a gun, always have a knife.

4). Whenever you carry a gun, also carry a knife...and some spare ammunition.

5). Carry the gun you can use best regardless of social fashion

6). Make sure you are good with that gun through continual and obsessive practice

7). Don't bluff or threaten with the gun. If you pull it, be certain you are justified and willing to use it.

8). Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.

9). If you can avoid having to shoot, it is a good thing, but do not second guess yourself once it has begun.

11). To facilitate the former, do not go to stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things at stupid times.

12). If you are involved in such activities, take a team with you....and rifles.

13). The default should be to mind your own business.

14). The only time minding your own business is superceded by getting involved is if what you see shocks the conscience of humanity and needs to be stopped.

15). The amount of violence you can justify and the number of rules you can break is directly proportionate to the level of evil displayed by your adversary.

16). Never apologize for using violence. Not only is it indicative of weakness but also of a lack of moral standing.

If you enjoyed reading about "16 Rules for the gunman All very true" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Blackstone
April 14, 2012, 04:24 PM
Where's number 10? :P

lostone1413
April 14, 2012, 04:29 PM
missed that one

ApacheCoTodd
April 14, 2012, 05:05 PM
Seems like kinda weird rambling to me and certainly not any kind of rules.

But, to each his own.

Shoobee
April 14, 2012, 05:11 PM
Here are some better rules:

- never go anywhere without a knife

- never bring a knife to a gunfight

- if youre going to shoot, shoot, dont talk

- dont shoot yourself in the foot, save your ammo for shooting the other guy

- watch your back at all times

- dont point a gun at anything you dont plan to kill

- an unloaded gun is not your gun, it will become somebody else's gun very soon

- dont play with toys if you dont know how they work

- shotguns speak the loudest in any confrontation

- practice practice practice

lostone1413
April 14, 2012, 05:21 PM
Good rules to. The one about a knife at a gunfight at times can be iffie. Doing force on force at 5 feet that is the distance most fights start at If the bad guy already has a knife out and you have to get your gun in play it could very well be over for you

russ69
April 14, 2012, 05:39 PM
What's a gunman?

earlthegoat2
April 14, 2012, 05:42 PM
8). Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.


So does this rule negate the universal rule of not shooting to kill but rather shooting to stop the threat?

I like it better because I always figured if you were shooting to stop the threat then byu default you just may be shooting to kill. It all depends on where your bullets hit.

lostone1413
April 14, 2012, 05:50 PM
Shooting to stop the threat just sounds better in court. You always shoot to kill. I remember training with my dad as a kid who was in allot of combat during WW2. He always said anything worth pointing a gun at is worth killing

Sam1911
April 14, 2012, 05:55 PM
8). Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.


So does this rule negate the universal rule of not shooting to kill but rather shooting to stop the threat?

No. Read it like this:
"Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means he may die. You may have killed a man. That's something you have to be able to accept."

Not "MUST kill" or "intending to kill." Their use of the phrase, "that means killing" is unfortunate and a bit of sloppy writing.

I always figured if you were shooting to stop the threat then byu default you just may be shooting to kill. It all depends on where your bullets hit.And "just may be" is the operative phrase there. Your shots MAY end up killing him. But that's not your intent, and whether he lives or dies is utterly irrelevant in the moment, so long as he stops his attack.

JohnBT
April 14, 2012, 05:58 PM
Here's another obvious rule.

17. Don't take a gun to jail after you plead guilty to fraud, etc.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82605

Johannes_Paulsen
April 14, 2012, 06:01 PM
Some of these don't even make sense. Take #16--NEVER apologize? What if you were wrong to use violence in the first place? Then apologizing seems like the least you can do, if you're a man of integrity.

browningguy
April 14, 2012, 06:01 PM
1). Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man.

What about the women that carry guns, how does this relate to them? The whole thing sounds like a bunch of rehashed stuff you might read anywhere.

Averageman
April 14, 2012, 06:15 PM
This all was stolen from Warrior Talk.
Gabe Suarez says it best,...go look.
Haters just keep hating, if thats what works for you.

Sam1911
April 14, 2012, 06:17 PM
You always shoot to kill.No, that's taking things too far. Your only lawful use of deadly force is to STOP someone from hurting or killing you or yours. (Or one or two other forcible felonies, depending on jurisdiction.)

Something like 80% of gunshot victims LIVE. That includes the guy who tried to mug you or who just broke into your house. If you shoot someone who's trying to hurt you and you wound him (or MISS!) and he turns around and runs, that's a successful stop. If he drops his weapon and throws up his hands, that's a successful stop. In either case, you have no further legal standing to shoot him or shoot at him. To do so would be manslaughter, at least, or likely murder. But if you let yourself slip into a "shoot to kill" mentality, you then are facing your own failure if you didn't kill him.

It sets up a bad thought path in your mind. If you're shooting "to kill" then you shoot until he's dead. If you're shooting "to stop the attack" then you shoot until the attack stops. We can all say, "well, I'd know that I should stop shooting to kill if he surrendered or fled," but there are very unfortunate cases to show that this is sometimes not the case at all. (Ersland?)

And, if your own understanding isn't worth the effort of less sloppy habits of speech and thought, consider how few people really understand how self-defense law works, and when and to what end it is legal and NOT legal to fire a weapon. (Just a quick survey of threads here would indicate that's MANY people.) The people you speak with, influence, and teach deserve a better understanding than the dangerously simplistic "shoot to kill" verbiage.

I remember training with my dad as a kid who was in allot of combat during WW2. He always said anything worth pointing a gun at is worth killing
Two points:
1) Combat is NOTHING like self-defense or any other lawful use of a firearm as a civilian. The rules are COMPLETELY different. In combat, a soldier's DUTY is to kill the enemy. As a citizen of a country at peace, you do not have any lawful authority to take the life of another human being. If you are forced to by the felonious actions of another, your guilt for breaking the law against homicide may be set aside by the state and/or a jury, due to the necessity of having to shoot to stop an attack, but you cannot decide that (and act on it) anyone must be killed.

2) Your Dad was trying to say something very true about not pointing a gun at anything you were not willing to destroy, but his phrasing (at least the way you've retold it here) mixed up that message until it became something it shouldn't be.

Johannes_Paulsen
April 14, 2012, 06:17 PM
@Averageman So these were misquoted?

Sam1911
April 14, 2012, 06:45 PM
Some things in that list are either less or more than they should be. An unfortunate byproduct of our unending tendency to try to distill complex and important ideas down to slogans to put on bumper stickers ... and then to repeat those slogans to ourselves as a substitute for actual thought.

1). Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man. Ooooh boy. Great. There is truth here (perhaps, "Carry because you are a human being, with the right to defend your own existance against violence?") but it gets muddied by slogan-izing the concept.

2). Always carry your gun regardless of social pressuresGood plan.

3). If you can't physically carry a gun, always have a knife.Er, ok...but many places you can't take a gun, you can't take a knife, either. How about just, "always have something at hand with which you could defend youself, and understand how to improvise if need be?"

4). Whenever you carry a gun, also carry a knife...and some spare ammunition.That's fine.

5). Carry the gun you can use best regardless of social fashionNo argument, really, though I know very VERY VERY few people who always carry THE GUN they use best. Ok...so none. (Maybe me, though, almost always! ;))

6). Make sure you are good with that gun through continual and obsessive practiceAMEN! Preach it, brother!

7). Don't bluff or threaten with the gun. If you pull it, be certain you are justified and willing to use it.Ditto!

8). Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.Got that one covered, see my posts above.

9). If you can avoid having to shoot, it is a good thing, but do not second guess yourself once it has begun.Yes, though I hear more stories of folks going overboard, or at least firing until slide lock, than I hear of folks pulling the trigger and then changing their minds.

11). To facilitate the former, do not go to stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things at stupid times.Words to live by. If you wouldn't go there without a gun, don't go there WITH one, either.

12). If you are involved in such activities, take a team with you....and rifles.Fine for warriors and LEOs. Has nothing at all to do with civilian self defense.

13). The default should be to mind your own business.

14). The only time minding your own business is superceded by getting involved is if what you see shocks the conscience of humanity and needs to be stopped.Yes! Or...when someone decides their business involves harming you.

15). The amount of violence you can justify and the number of rules you can break is directly proportionate to the level of evil displayed by your adversary.This one's a bit convoluted. There is really only ONE level of violence available to the self-defender in most of the US. Or rather, all violence is equally unlawful, until the point that you MUST use force -- and then everything is on the table. There is no effective "pyramid of force" available to the "citizen" (with very VERY few exceptions).

However, the concept that you are break(ing) the rules (the law, actually) in using force is a good one to keep in mind. You are committing a crime in assaulting, and/or possibly killing, another person. You must have NO OTHER CHOICE, and you must be prepared to throw yourself on the mercy of the court, and explain to a "fair and impartial" group of fellow citizens why you couldn't get out of that situation any other way but by committing the ultimate crime.

16). Never apologize for using violence. Not only is it indicative of weakness but also of a lack of moral standing.Good basic concept, but the moralizing and "weakness" angle misses the point. You don't apologize because you are saying "Yes, I did it. I deliberately shot this person. I caused his injuries/death. And here's why I had to do that..." While you may be infinitely sad that it happened, and sorry that anyone died, apologizing for your act puts into question the fact that it was RIGHT and PURPOSEFUL. The prosecution (if you're charged) is going to be trying to show that your act was a mistake -- something that should not have been done. Don't do their work for them.

As I said...lots of complicated and crucial understanding here, "folded, spindled, and mutilated" until they can be squeezed into bumper sticker slogans. :rolleyes:

lostone1413
April 14, 2012, 06:47 PM
Sure they came from Warrior talk Thought some might be interested. I know Gabe and have trained with him a few times

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 14, 2012, 07:05 PM
To put what Sam said a bit simpler, you can say "I'm sorry that someone died but I am not sorry it wasn't ME"

And to another point Sam, I am of the type, if you see my handgun, it WILL be the last thing you ever see. I refuse to give someone that had the stupid notion to attack me, with my death in mind, the chance to do it AGAIN! Too many in the world today have no respect for human life or someones property. Sorry but I refuse to be a statistic. It's why, when I carry, I carry a substantial caliber with serious ammunition intended to kill not just wound. And I practice, almost daily, to triple tap to center sternum and brain pan. There are just too many chances nowadays that if you just fired to wound, that you would end up with a bullet in your back later on down the road after the idiot recovered.

Sam1911
April 14, 2012, 07:20 PM
I am of the type, if you see my handgun, it WILL be the last thing you ever see.
Then you have prepared yourself to become a murderer who will kill even though he KNOWS that he has no lawful justification for his act. I am very sorry to hear this, and I hope very much for your sake that such a thing never comes to pass.

There are just too many chances nowadays that if you just fired to wound, that you would end up with a bullet in your back later on down the road after the idiot recovered.


What you are describing is unlawful manslaughter, at least. You CAN NOT kill someone in order to keep them from doing something someday. That includes that they might testify against you, or that they may in fact someday try to get revenge. That is simply and utterly against the law.

And, your post is a perfect (unfortunate) example of what we mean when we say...

Everyone who posts here or anywhere else on the Internet should understand that such posts are permanent, and they may be subject to discovery in legal proceedings at any time in the future. Should any member ever find himself or herself involved in such proceedings, posts containing comments that could be interpreted unfavorably could prove damaging.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=604948

hso
April 14, 2012, 07:22 PM
3 is incorrect.

It implies a knife is the next best self defense tool to a gun.

You should always carry a knife, but a stick is a better defensive tool.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 14, 2012, 07:49 PM
Then you have prepared yourself to become a murderer who will kill even though he KNOWS that he has no lawful justification for his act. I am very sorry to hear this, and I hope very much for your sake that such a thing never comes to pass.

Been on that rodeo a couple times now Sam. And no I do not consider myself a "murderer" after I had already taken a bullet from a coward firing from a hidden position as I exited a building. Basically, he started, I finished.

What you are describing is unlawful manslaughter, at least. You CAN NOT kill someone in order to keep them from doing something someday. That includes that they might testify against you, or that they may in fact someday try to get revenge. That is simply and utterly against the law.

No but you CAN kill the SOB when they are trying to kill YOU. What I said was I would NOT give them the chance to TRY IT AGAIN!

Let me ask you this Sam, when you practice, do you practice shooting shoulder shots or center mass? You practice center mass! Therefor you are practicing to KILL not WOUND. Do you carry a .22 or a 9mm or above? I'd bet 9mm or above. (maybe a .380 on hot days) You load up solids or hollow point? What I am saying Sam is that you are practicing and equipping to KILL not wound. Your own actions do not support your statements. Every combat and self defense teacher I have ever known has taught center mass and shoot to kill. Shoot to wound requires too much thought and aim in a possible critical situation. Center mass is deadly and has the INTENT of lethal force. With what you are stating, anyone that fires to kill is a murderer and that is NOT so. Homicide and Murder are 2 different things. One can be justified while the other can not. Man comes at me with murderous intent, man will die. Plain and simple. I hold no animosity towards anyone but if someone is trying to kill me, then I will have absolutely NO qualms about ending their life post haste. What you are trying to teach will in fact get someone killed. Someone may have it in the back of their heads that they need to just shoot for a non mortal wound while under fire. BIG MISTAKE! I shoot to end the conflict and to keep from dying. If you want to risk your life for some fool that is trying to kill you then that's your business. But don't be trying to tell folks that if you shoot to kill in a life or death conflict that they are shooting with "murderous" intent. It's totally incorrect.

mmitch
April 14, 2012, 08:04 PM
He "could" tell us #10, but, then, he would have to shoot us...

Mike

ApacheCoTodd
April 14, 2012, 08:33 PM
He "could" tell us #10, but, then, he would have to shoot us...

Mike
Only if he's a Gun-man.:evil:

Shoobee
April 14, 2012, 08:35 PM
I would not bring a gun to church, a wedding, or a funeral. But there are cases when one might have been warranted then. Odds are very slim though.

Workplaces virtually never allow you pack heat or blades, so in your car, locked up, is where they would need to stay during work hours.

There are so many exceptions to the original list that is does sound like a lot of bunk to me.

Sort of like when Conan The Barbarian is told by his father, "only this you can trust."

If you life consists of hanging out in places where you need to contantly be armed, then I think you need to move otta tha getto.

Axel Larson
April 14, 2012, 08:39 PM
@Freedom Fighter we had this discussion in the thread on fighting shotguns, we do choose ammunition and weapons that may kill and sometimes have a a higher chance of killing than other weapons but that is because they also have a higher chance of stopping the threat. The point Sam is making is about intent, I think it was Sam or one of the other mods that said it was a software issue not a hardware issue. Our intent as gun owners should be to stop the threat, if the bad guy runs away, the threat is gone, if the bad guy drops his or her weapon and lays down on the ground the threat is gone, if the bad guy attacks you and you are forced to fire your weapon once he/she is not attacking you anymore the threat is stopped. The point is in intent, if you draw a firearm you should be prepared to use it but if the sight of the weapon is enough to scare off the attacker the threat is gone.

browningguy
April 14, 2012, 09:17 PM
Gabe Suarez says it best,...go look.
Haters just keep hating, if thats what works for you.

Number one is questionable, as for number two if you don't think there can be dissenting opinions then the internet is the wrong place for you.

Suarez has his fanboys and that's ok, he makes a living from it, but some other people may not like his methods, background, or heck even his hairstyle, and that's ok too.

Old Fuff
April 14, 2012, 09:24 PM
I think that most so-called rules are made up by those who have never, "been there, done that."

I once ask Charles Askins, who between the Border Patrol and military service had killed more men then most of the more famous western gunfighters put together, what he thought about rules concerning gunfighting.

He replied, "There is only one that matters..."

"That is, to survive."

forestdavegump
April 14, 2012, 09:44 PM
Saw you posted this at a few places on the net, glad the message is getting out what was 10?

Here is what Gabe posted...

Because of Zimm - Survival Rules For The Gunman
1. Don’t carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man.

2. Always carry your gun regardless of social pressures

3. If you can’t physically carry a gun, always have a knife.

4. Whenever you carry a gun, also carry a knife…and some spare ammunition.

5. Carry the gun you can use best regardless of social fashion

6. Make sure you are good with that gun through continual and perhaps obsessive practice

7. Don’t bluff or threaten with the gun. If you pull it, be certain you are justified and willing to use it.

8. Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.

9. If you can avoid having to shoot, it is a good thing, but do not second guess yourself once it has begun.

10. To facilitate the former, do not go to stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things at stupid times.

11. If you are involved in such activities, take a team with you….and rifles.

12. The default should be to mind your own business.

13. The only time minding your own business is superceded by getting involved is if what you see shocks the conscience of humanity and needs to be stopped.

14. The amount of violence you can justify and the number of rules you can break is directly proportionate to the level of evil displayed by your adversary.

15. Never apologize for using violence. Not only is it indicative of weakness but also of a lack of moral standing.
Gabe Suarez

Warrior Talk Blog
Tactical Gear For The Civilian Fighter
Training For The Martial Civilian

Blessed be The Lord My Rock - Jesus Christ
To Whom I Owe All That I Am,
All That I Have Been,
Or Will Ever Be.

From Gabe at Warrior Talk http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?97927-Because-of-Zimm-Survival-Rules-For-The-Gunman

Paris
April 14, 2012, 10:28 PM
Some of these make sense, others gave me quite a chuckle; my responses are in bold.

1). Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man.

I quiver to consider anyone would use such novel bravado in everyday speech, let alone subscribe to it in a serious fashion. Here are the facts: The laws of our land protect our human right to possess firearms and you don’t need a reason to possess them.

2). Always carry your gun regardless of social pressures

Social pressure often times is the law. A group of people, we’ll call “the government”, have been chosen by the people, we’ll call “the socialists”, to enact laws to oversee, we’ll say “govern”, our society (there’s that root word again: social). Being that I am part of this society and like it, I am inclined to live within the law and therefor will always carry my gun within the law.

3). If you can't physically carry a gun, always have a knife.

Read above.

4). Whenever you carry a gun, also carry a knife...and some spare ammunition.

Ignoring the contradictory nature of this item with previous items we’ll just skip to latter half. In order for the gun to function as intended it requires a single cartridge and therefore all additional ammunition is “spare”. There are a thousand threads on a thousand Internet forums debating how much ammunition you should carry or shouldn’t carry. A better suggestion would read, “Don’t forget to bring ammunition, too.”

5). Carry the gun you can use best regardless of social fashion

I’d like to think I am fairly handy with the AR15 and can do things with it I can’t with a pocket .380 ACP – somehow though heading down to the Kroger with my kids in tow and an AR15 strapped to my back seems a little… unsocial. Though I can tell these rules were not written for a thinker and perhaps that reader would see no problem wondering around their local shopping mall with an AR15 and a thousand rounds strapped to their chest. Do you think the local police may object? Nahhhh…

6). Make sure you are good with that gun through continual and obsessive practice

People who conduct obsessive behavior are typically doing so because of a mental illness of some sort. Training to obsession would no doubt lead to sloppy, fatigued and error prone behavior and should not be the goal of a marksman or gun handler. Better said, diligent and thoughtful training is a must.

7). Don't bluff or threaten with the gun. If you pull it, be certain you are justified and willing to use it.

Winner Winner Chicken Dinner. This is the first item I can agree with 100%.

8). Using it means shooting the other man or men in the chest and/or the face. Yes, it means killing.

Shoot. To. Stop. Less. Bravado. More. Brain. Use.

9). If you can avoid having to shoot, it is a good thing, but do not second guess yourself once it has begun.

Critical thinking is never a bad thing.

11). To facilitate the former, do not go to stupid places with stupid people to do stupid things at stupid times.

I like this one; it doesn’t appear to have been penned by the author of the previous items. I approve.

12). If you are involved in such activities, take a team with you....and rifles.

We’re off the beaten path here, where the rest of this list leads, no one knows.

13). The default should be to mind your own business.

A man is not an island.

14). The only time minding your own business is superceded by getting involved is if what you see shocks the conscience of humanity and needs to be stopped.

We’re back to shock and awe, eh?

15). The amount of violence you can justify and the number of rules you can break is directly proportionate to the level of evil displayed by your adversary.

The universe doesn’t judge behavior. We have actions and reactions and more actions and more reactions. That said, I don’t believe evil can be easily quantified but if you are observing an action which you would term evil, and I don’t apply the world lightly, then by all means, nuke it from orbit.

16). Never apologize for using violence. Not only is it indicative of weakness but also of a lack of moral standing.

To be sorry for a thing does not imply or convict guilt or wrongness. This item strikes me the most of all the others because at the point humanity has progressed to, the fact that the technology we have developed allows for such a discussion between people of different backgrounds, cultures and nationalities to exist, that this type of thinking would exist in that advanced medium, shows how far we have to go. I may have been joking a bit with my analysis of the other items, but not with this one. The carelessness and absoluteness of this idea is magnificent and terrible and we should be both in awe and in fear of such thinking.

ApacheCoTodd
April 14, 2012, 10:35 PM
Well, there you go Paris - responding to blusterous clap-trap with reason and accountability. These "rules" look like a list of slogans which might otherwise be found on gun show tee-shirts.

Macchina
April 14, 2012, 11:10 PM
What's a gunman?
I don't know what a gunMAN is, but this is a gunWOMAN:

http://www.impawards.com/2007/posters/grind_house.jpg

gunlaw
April 15, 2012, 12:17 AM
Sorry, but as a ccw holder, a gun guy and a criminal defense attorney I find the original post disturbing and very un HighRoad. However just my opinion. I'll leave the judgement up to greater minds and higher authorities.

-eaux-
April 15, 2012, 12:33 AM
I'll just offer up what my Daddy taught me, you can take it or leave it.
"If you pull your pistol and don't use it, you shouldn't have pulled it. You could have whipped him with a knife or a stick or a fist. If you pull your pistol, you use it. And you do not shoot to wound, or incapacitate, or any of that other <deleted>. If you pull it, you pulled it because it was time to use it. If it was time to use it, use it till it's empty. If you pulled it out and didn't use it, you shouldn't have pulled it, you should've taken a whoopin or minded your own business. It isn't there to boast your manhood, it's there to prove it. If you draw and don't fire, you should never have drawn, and you deserve to be in trouble."
--a 36 yr CWO4 Marine, AKA my Dad---

Sam1911
April 15, 2012, 09:44 AM
Then you have prepared yourself to become a murderer who will kill even though he KNOWS that he has no lawful justification for his act. I am very sorry to hear this, and I hope very much for your sake that such a thing never comes to pass.

Been on that rodeo a couple times now Sam. And no I do not consider myself a "murderer" after I had already taken a bullet from a coward firing from a hidden position as I exited a building. Basically, he started, I finished.
I'm not really sure what that means. You killed someone who attacked you? Well, glad you prevailed. If you're admitting that you killed him after he no longer presented an immediate, credible threat to you ... wow.

What you are describing is unlawful manslaughter, at least. You CAN NOT kill someone in order to keep them from doing something someday. That includes that they might testify against you, or that they may in fact someday try to get revenge. That is simply and utterly against the law.

No but you CAN kill the SOB when they are trying to kill YOU. What I said was I would NOT give them the chance to TRY IT AGAIN!
So what exactly are you saying? You are saying one of two things:

1) You are SUCH a good shot under all conditions that you cannot shoot anything less than a perfect set of shots to vital organs -- AND that you have some power beyond even medical science to control whether "critical" hits to vital structures actually cause DEATH. Many many instances exist of hits to even the brain which do not prove lethal.

or

2) You will press any "defense" to the point of ensuring that the attacker DIES, no matter what. I think this is much more likely to be what you're dancing around (not) saying, but this is how we end up with guys like Jerome Ersland, executing his attacker clearly beyond any lawful use of force, and being convicted for doing so.

Let me ask you this Sam, when you practice, do you practice shooting shoulder shots or center mass? You practice center mass! Therefor you are practicing to KILL not WOUND.
I'm practicing to make a compelling shot. The shot(s) most likely to STOP my attacker are also the shots which would be likely to KILL him. That's too bad for him. But if he forces me to shoot, I have no intent to kill him. Whether he lives or dies is irrelevant. All that matters is his attack on me stops ASAP.

Do you carry a .22 or a 9mm or above? I'd bet 9mm or above. (maybe a .380 on hot days) You load up solids or hollow point? What I am saying Sam is that you are practicing and equipping to KILL not wound.
Nope. In fact, quite the opposite! If I wanted to KILL him, I could do that perfectly well with a .22! They're lethal on humans. MANY people die from .22 shots, eventually. But that's not my point. I need to STOP HIM RIGHT NOW! I need to choose something that's more likely to shut down or break things he needs to continue to attack me. Many, if not most, of those things can be put back together on the operating table. He very well may survive -- MOST gunshot victims DO! (Like I said, 4/5 or 80% live.) I don't care. But he has to STOP hurting me right now.

Every combat and self defense teacher I have ever known has taught center mass...Yes! ...and shoot to kill.No.

Shoot to wound requires too much thought and aim in a possible critical situation. Who in the world brought up shoot to wound? That's almost as bad as this "shoot to kill" talk! You cannot TRY to wound someone -- that's a horrible strategy. If you have to shoot, you have to place the most effective possible shot(s). That MAY kill the attacker, or it MAY not. Whichever is irrelevant to your purposes. All that matters is that he must STOP.

Center mass is deadly and has the INTENT of lethal force.Bullcrap. Intent is whatever you set out to do. The INTENT is to stop a lethal threat right now. The INTENT is NOT to kill him. The INTENT is not to wound him. The intent is to STOP him from hurting you. Nothing else matters.

Man comes at me with murderous intent, man will die. Plain and simple.Plain and simple? Really? Read my two points above. You're either saying that you are a god-like shot with a handgun under any and all conditions AND that you have control over physiological factors that no one can control. Your bullets will land exactly where you wanted every time, and the destruction to systems that they cause WILL cause immediate death. No one can say either of those things with confidence. To do so is absurdly overestimating your abilities and control over the world.

Or, you're saying that you will carry the attack until you've killed the man, whether or not you have a lawful justification to do so. Jerome Ersland all over again. Surely you know better than that!

I hold no animosity towards anyone but if someone is trying to kill me, then I will have absolutely NO qualms about ending their life post haste.Of course. Their life is forfeit. Their death is one ACCEPTABLE result of protecting yourself. It is not up to you whether they DIE, only that they stop hurting you.

What you are trying to teach will in fact get someone killed. Someone may have it in the back of their heads that they need to just shoot for a non mortal wound while under fire.I have never, am not now, and will never say ANY such thing. You need to make sure you're reading exactly what I'm writing. Once more, for clarity:

If you must shoot, you shoot until the immediate threat to you has stopped.

If the attacker runs away = success, stop shooting.
If the attacker surrenders = success, stop shooting.
If the attacker falls wounded/disabled = success, stop shooting.
If the attacker falls dead = success, stop shooting.

Shoot the most effective, compelling shots you can, and know that the life or death of the attacker is not your concern.

But don't be trying to tell folks that if you shoot to kill in a life or death conflict that they are shooting with "murderous" intent. It's totally incorrect.You have said the following:

if you see my handgun, it WILL be the last thing you ever see. ... There are just too many chances nowadays that if you just fired to wound, that you would end up with a bullet in your back later on down the road after the idiot recovered. These indicate that you will take steps to make sure the man is dead. You will NOT let him leave the scene alive (so no "bullet in your back later on down the road"). You WILL kill him, even though your initial shots to stop his attack are statistically unlikely to end his life immediately. Those things would be murder.

If he dies as a result of your necessary action to STOP him, that is acceptable. If he does not, your lawful right to take his life is gone, and any further steps you take to ensure he expires constitute murder.

Is this more clear, now?

Sam1911
April 15, 2012, 09:53 AM
If it was time to use it, use it till it's empty. That would seem to come from the era when common sidearms held 6 or 7 rounds.

I sometimes carry an xDM. That's 19+1. I can't really imagine following the advice to "use it till it's empty" with modern sidearms holding 15-20 rounds.

Personally, I wouldn't follow that advice under any circumstances, for several reasons, but modern guns just help illustrate the folly.

danez71
April 15, 2012, 09:59 AM
Sam, I guessing you realize this but he's baseing his arguement that 'shoot to stop' = 's 'shoot to kill' with no variance.

Its that same arguement of 'pro choice = pro abortion' which is simply not true but you're likely never going to get that type of person to see the variance of the two statements based on my experience.

gym
April 15, 2012, 10:38 AM
This sounds like something from a seals movie. It makes no sense in everyday life. Like the man said surviving is the key. I don't travel with a "team", I don't know too many people who do. I think following that kind of advice lands you in jail for sure. Many of us who have been carrying and working in unusual businesses that incur danger, know what we are capable of doing, and the consequences we face for using a gun, and have come to terms with and accepted it, but to put that kind of macho nonesense out there is not what we are about. Guns are a last resort. Killing is the the ending of a threat at it's worse outcome. It's not the accomplishment one seeks, nor something to be proud of putting out there, like commanments.

Moose1995
April 15, 2012, 11:24 AM
I agree with just about everything Sam1911 has said. Having seen how poorly the law responded to a firearm incident in my home last October, I can assure you that if you even pull a gun in the state of Illinois, regardless of the laws, the judges make up their own rules. You could be fighting legal battles and possible jail time for a long time, even if justified. My wife lost her right to possess a firearm because she pulled my XD on her sisters ex boyfriend after entering our home. Illinois law states that if someone enters your home exhibiting violent behavior and you think that he may commit a felony inside your home, you have a right to defend yourself. Her sisters ex was just outside the house kicking the door of her sisters current boyfriends car in. Kicked off all the mirrors as well. He originally came to pick up his daughter, but became enraged when he saw the current boyfriends car was here. He then pushed past my wife trying to enter my home. She told him not to go into the house several times. He went in, screaming and yelling. (BTW, she has the whole incident on video on her iphone). Presuming, after the kicking in of the car door and mirrors, that he was going to assault her current boyfriend (hence the intent to commit a felony), my wife grabbed the xd out of our bedroom (she, regardless of what I told her about if you pull a gun, its because you intend to use it, left the gun unloaded because she didnt want to shoot him. I know, more training needed here) She comes out and shows him the weapon. First thing he does is goes and picks up his daughter who was sleeping on the couch, and starts heading for the door. He calls the cops. Cops come and watch the whole incident on her phone. H e gets arrested for criminal trespass. After he gets bailed out, he goes to court and files an order of protection against my wife for pulling the gun. Even though, according to the letter of the law, she was within her rights to pull the weapon, the judge ruled in his favor (his comments in court showed me he was clearly anti-gun). So she now has a 2 year order of protection against her, and her foid was revoked due to this. My whole point is that the courts do not always side in favor of justification, or the law for that fact. You get a bad jury or judge, you may spend the rest of your life behind bars for the "shoot to kill" mentality. Shoot to stop the threat. That means shooting in the chest or head. If you know what you're doing with a gun, you most likely will stop the threat, permanently. Just don't go into a self defense scenario with the intent to kill. Its no longer self defense then.

Old Fuff
April 15, 2012, 11:29 AM
When at one time I was employed within the firearms industry I had an unusual opportunity to meet a small number of what might be called “modern gunfighters.” Living on the U.S./Mexican border provided a few more opportunities. Some of them were well known, at least within our own community, where others weren’t. All had been connected in some way with law enforcement or a military service. With one exception they didn’t exploit their experiences, but they would – within they’re own circles – use them to illustrate and/or train others.

They didn’t conduct themselves in any alignment of specific rules, but rather by using learned skills, uncommon courage, and common sense.

When they had to shoot they did, but only under circumstance where they had no reasonable alternative, and when it came to that they coolly and effectively did what had to be done. At this point someone (other then themselves) usually died, but it was not a preordained outcome. Ending the lethal threat to themselves and sometimes others was.

“Sam” is right in explaining the very critical difference between defensive shooting and cold-blooded killing where killing may be unnecessary. The legal use of deadly force is very limited, and stepping over the line is likely to end with a long penitentiary sentence or worse. Carrying a firearm entails a substantial responsibility, and using it, even under justified circumstances will never have an easy outcome. If any rule is to be remembered, this is the one.

dprice3844444
April 15, 2012, 11:38 AM
almost sounds like the rules of leroy jethro gibbs

fortyluv
April 15, 2012, 12:43 PM
Words to live by. If you wouldn't go there without a gun, don't go there WITH one, either.

THIS!!! Repeat 1,000 times.

ApacheCoTodd
April 15, 2012, 01:18 PM
Words to live by. If you wouldn't go there without a gun, don't go there WITH one, either.

THIS!!! Repeat 1,000 times.
Now, that is one wonderfully multi-layered general guideline when a choice is an option. While by no means a RULE, it is a very valuable perspective to pull out and rub on in decision making.

shuvelrider
April 15, 2012, 01:50 PM
Think I would rather be a Rifle-Man, cause then I would get my own TV show :neener:

pockets
April 16, 2012, 07:17 AM
Is there an official 'gunman' badge available to carry alongside the 'CCW' badge?

What an odd and disjointed compilation of spiffy one-liners.

.

Loosedhorse
April 16, 2012, 09:05 AM
Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man.Puhl-leez. Besides the stupid macho of this "because you are in fact a man" stuff, does anyone realize that women carry, too? And NOT because they are in fact men? :rolleyes::banghead:

Note to self: scratch off Suarez International as rule-writer for me.No. Read it like this: No: I think we should read it as written. If they want us to read it a different way, they should write it a different way.Therefor you are practicing to KILL not WOUND.Speaking for myself (but I think I am supporting Sam) the only time I would have intent to kill is if I were murdering someone. The only time I would be "practicing to KILL" is if I were practicing to murder someone.

Otherwise my intent is to stop and to defend myself from lethal harm. I am practicing to stop and to defend myself from lethal harm. Period. Your intent when you shoot and your purpose when you practice are up to you, just as mine are up to me.

j1
April 16, 2012, 09:24 AM
Remember that after the incident is over do not say anything to anyone but your lawyer, and I am not a lawyer either. What you say is of the utmost importance, but what you do not say is even more important.

Sam1911
April 16, 2012, 11:45 AM
No: I think we should read it as written. If they want us to read it a different way, they should write it a different way.Well...without them here to offer clarification, I suppose we do indeed have to take it at face value -- as disappointing as that may be. :(

I think I'll continue to assume that they just got so sloppy with the sloganizing that they ended up saying something they didn't really mean. But I'm a forgiving sort like that. :)

Smokin Gator
April 16, 2012, 12:42 PM
"Don't carry the gun to make you a man. Carry because you are in fact a man. "

"Puhl-leez. Besides the stupid macho of this "because you are in fact a man" stuff, does anyone realize that women carry, too? And NOT because they are in fact men?"

To me all the first statement is saying is that a man takes the responsibility to protect himself and his family, sometimes others. One way to be able to do that is to carry a gun. Some people are so "anti violence" that they refuse to hurt anyone else, and put themselves and worse, their families, at risk by not being prepared to defend them. They don't want to lower themselves down to the level of the perpetrator. They are somehow "above that". Mark

Ringolevio
April 16, 2012, 01:18 PM
Sam1911 wrote:
3). If you can't physically carry a gun, always have a knife.
Er, ok...but many places you can't take a gun, you can't take a knife, either. How about just, "always have something at hand with which you could defend youself, and understand how to improvise if need be?"

This reminds me of what my dad used to say:
"Fighting with nothing but your hands is for the boxing ring. The first rule of fighting in the street is to have something in your hand (and preferably something that increases your reach)."

As to the whole "shoot to kill vs. shoot to stop" question, my dad said "Shooting the gun out of the other guy's hand is for Roy Rogers or Hopalong Cassidy. You always aim for the middle of your 'target', and if your 'target' happens to die as a result, that's just an unfortunate side effect of having been 'neutralized'".

Besides, aren't we obligated (by law and by morality), after shooting someone in self-defense, to promptly summon medical aid for the person we've shot, no matter how badly he "deserved" to be shot?

Sam1911
April 16, 2012, 01:25 PM
Besides, aren't we obligated (by law and by morality), after shooting someone in self-defense, to promptly summon medical aid for the person we've shot, no matter how badly he "deserved" to be shot?

That's almost a moot point. We all know that it is incredibly important to be the first on the phone to 911 reporting the shooting. That summons the police, of course, but the ambulance will be right behind them.

paintballdude902
April 16, 2012, 01:32 PM
just because you have a gun doesnt make you a badass. it makes you equal to someone bigger and stronger.


i hate the fact that i cant carry on base, especially when i get off work at 2-3 am

Ignition Override
April 16, 2012, 10:54 PM
Don't forget the pharmacist or assistant, who was robbed in the back of the drug store, then chased the robber to the front of the store and shot him.

The pharmacy guy was convicted, and I have no idea about the robber.

Fremmer
April 16, 2012, 11:09 PM
Those rules are pretty cheesy. sounds like a lecture and doesn't really teach you much important.

shuvelrider
April 17, 2012, 04:33 AM
Beyond dumb, sounds like something made up by a hollywood action hero for a movie---------------Rambo comes to mind.

WardenWolf
April 17, 2012, 05:07 AM
#10 is to be observant, especially of your surroundings, and notice that there is no #10.

Loosedhorse
April 17, 2012, 08:01 AM
Besides, aren't we obligated (by law and by morality), after shooting someone in self-defense, to promptly summon medical aid for the person we've shot, no matter how badly he "deserved" to be shot?The answer to your question is we are morally obligated. We are legally "obligated" to the extent that "it looks good" to specifically ask for medical aid for the person you shot--it will confirm your claim that when you shot you did not have murderous intent, and were content just to stop him, not kill him.

And you were attentive to making sure the one didn't bleed into the other.

Flintknapper
April 17, 2012, 09:14 AM
He "could" tell us #10, but, then, he would have to shoot us...
:D


10. If forced to shoot, continue doing so...until the threat has changed shape or caught fire.

That's the "bumper sticker" version.

The P/C version is:

"If forced to shoot, continue until the threat has ceased, no more, no less".

^^^^^^^ This the one I subscribe to. I guess I lack the Uber Warrior mentality. :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "16 Rules for the gunman All very true" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!