GuyWithQuestions
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2006
- Messages
- 451
So what would be an effective strategy?
So what would be an effective self-defense strategy for damage control after you do everything to avoid the situation? Pepper spray may not work in certain situations, and many studies show that firearms are notorious for not causing immediate enough stopping power to save your life. According to the FBI, if you completely destroy an attacker's heart, they still have 10-15 seconds until they lose motor control and consciousness. During this time they can still continue to use deadly force on you and in real life are known to do this. If you shoot someone in the femoral or lungs, they can still cause damage in the mean time when you're waiting for them to die! A lady was attacked by a guy and the lady shot the guy in the lungs and he started running away after that. If he had enough coordination to then run in the opposite direction, then couldn't he have had enough to kill her if that's what he was psychologically determined to do? Often the instant incapacitation from gun shot wounds is psychological, before the actual physical affects kick in! Is relying on something psychological a reliable self-defense means, while waiting for the actual physical affects to kick in? I've heard of police officers using both pepper spray and well-placed handgun shots on suspects only to be slaughtered by the assailant! I saw a police video of a police officer who was an ex-Marine who was shot by a short guy with a .22. The officer had a much more powerfull handgun and shot at the assailant quite a few times. The short guy then shot the officer in the right place and the officer died. The officer's handgun didn't seem to be that effective in the video. Police have been known to shoot those on PCP multiple times and still get severely injured. 80% of those who are shot with handguns actually live, and it's not practical to carry better firearms with you at all times such as high powered rifles and shotguns (which kill 70% of the time). The only scientifically proven way to instantly stop someone using a firearm is to destroy the central nervous system, which is very difficult in the stress of life and death situations. I heard that police hit their targets about 20% of the time in actual combat situations, so that's why they're trained to aim for center mass instead of the brain stem. I'm not sure, but I think there's a reason why SWAT teams may be sent into very dangerous situations instead of the regular police with their handguns that can fail.
So what would be a reliable self-defense strategy for a non-LEO citizen, that's legal? Would a good baseball bat be effective in holding someone back? But then you can't carry one around with you all the time and it wouldn't work in certain situations, such as long-distance. What would be an effective means?
So what would be an effective self-defense strategy for damage control after you do everything to avoid the situation? Pepper spray may not work in certain situations, and many studies show that firearms are notorious for not causing immediate enough stopping power to save your life. According to the FBI, if you completely destroy an attacker's heart, they still have 10-15 seconds until they lose motor control and consciousness. During this time they can still continue to use deadly force on you and in real life are known to do this. If you shoot someone in the femoral or lungs, they can still cause damage in the mean time when you're waiting for them to die! A lady was attacked by a guy and the lady shot the guy in the lungs and he started running away after that. If he had enough coordination to then run in the opposite direction, then couldn't he have had enough to kill her if that's what he was psychologically determined to do? Often the instant incapacitation from gun shot wounds is psychological, before the actual physical affects kick in! Is relying on something psychological a reliable self-defense means, while waiting for the actual physical affects to kick in? I've heard of police officers using both pepper spray and well-placed handgun shots on suspects only to be slaughtered by the assailant! I saw a police video of a police officer who was an ex-Marine who was shot by a short guy with a .22. The officer had a much more powerfull handgun and shot at the assailant quite a few times. The short guy then shot the officer in the right place and the officer died. The officer's handgun didn't seem to be that effective in the video. Police have been known to shoot those on PCP multiple times and still get severely injured. 80% of those who are shot with handguns actually live, and it's not practical to carry better firearms with you at all times such as high powered rifles and shotguns (which kill 70% of the time). The only scientifically proven way to instantly stop someone using a firearm is to destroy the central nervous system, which is very difficult in the stress of life and death situations. I heard that police hit their targets about 20% of the time in actual combat situations, so that's why they're trained to aim for center mass instead of the brain stem. I'm not sure, but I think there's a reason why SWAT teams may be sent into very dangerous situations instead of the regular police with their handguns that can fail.
So what would be a reliable self-defense strategy for a non-LEO citizen, that's legal? Would a good baseball bat be effective in holding someone back? But then you can't carry one around with you all the time and it wouldn't work in certain situations, such as long-distance. What would be an effective means?