16 Rules for the gunman All very true

[Axel Larson]

@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.

 

[mortablunt]

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

You aren't a badass until you've earned it.

2). Always carry your gun regardless of social pressures

Openly or concealed; it doesn't matter

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

A nice big one.

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

And use a good retention holster.

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

In that case, pass me a Kalashnikov.

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

And don't pass it to somebody who lacks a clue.

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

Deaths threats are marvelously effective at making people angry and nothing else.

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

keep firing until they go down or flee.

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

Invent a cover story after you've ended the fight. During a fight, if you can second guess yourself, then that's effort that you could be using to defeat your enemy.

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

And carry openly in order to give a visible deterent.

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

Just bring a rifle with you to begin with.

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

And watch yourself

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.

And when it helps instead of making things worse.

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.

And the amount of money in your legal fund.

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

Apologize for mistakes and make it clear that you are not a kill happy sociopath; apologizing is indicative of the greater strength to admit that you are wrong. IF you are not truly sorry that you killed or wounded or crippled someone, then do not apologize (something I learned from Russians). Say that it was unfortunate but it happened. A real man can admit his mistakes and regret.

 

[browningguy]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

What's a gunman?

I don't know what a gunMAN is, but this is a gunWOMAN:

 

[gunlaw]

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-]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

almost sounds like the rules of leroy jethro gibbs

 

[fortyluv]

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]

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.

 

[mortablunt]

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.

+1 to both of you.

 

[shuvelrider]

Think I would rather be a Rifle-Man, cause then I would get my own TV show

 

[pockets]

Is there an official 'gunman' badge available to carry alongside the 'CCW' badge?

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

.

 

[Loosedhorse]

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? :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]

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]

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.