16 Rules for the gunman All very true

[lostone1413]

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 The only time minding your own business is superceded by getting involved is if what you see shocks the conscience of humanity and needs to be stopped.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

 

[Blackstone]

Where's number 10?

 

[lostone1413]

missed that one

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Seems like kinda weird rambling to me and certainly not any kind of rules.

But, to each his own.

 

[Shoobee]

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]

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]

What's a gunman?

 

[earlthegoat2]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

@Averageman So these were misquoted?

 

[Sam1911]

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 pressures

Good 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 fashion

No 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 practice

AMEN! 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.

 

[lostone1413]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

He "could" tell us #10, but, then, he would have to shoot us...

Mike

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

He "could" tell us #10, but, then, he would have to shoot us...

Mike

Only if he's a Gun-man.

 

[Shoobee]

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.