# Why Mainstream Firearms Training Will Get You Killed



## teotwaki

see the article here on the forum from Badger Peak: 
http://www.preparedsociety.com/entries/Why-Mainstream-Firearms-Training-Will-Get-You-Killed.html

I'd like to discuss that article in this thread and lead towards distilling an outline of how any of us could train to align with the theories of the article.


Evade Rather Than Engage: single person and small group tactics choices
Stealth: Silenced weapons methods (obey your state's laws in peace time)
Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance
Proper weapons use: sexy infrared laser designators may get you killed
Training Methods: Prepper training VS. LEO & Military techniques


----------



## Dakine

teotwaki said:


> see the article here on the forum from Badger Peak:
> http://www.preparedsociety.com/entries/Why-Mainstream-Firearms-Training-Will-Get-You-Killed.html
> 
> I'd like to discuss that article in this thread and lead towards distilling an outline of how any of us could train to align with the theories of the article.
> 
> 
> Evade Rather Than Engage: single person and small group tactics choices
> Stealth: Silenced weapons methods (obey your state's laws in peace time)
> Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance
> Proper weapons use: sexy infrared laser designators may get you killed
> Training Methods: Prepper training VS. LEO & Military techniques


I know it seems upside down, and I will go read the article to see how that changes my opinions, but here's my first reaction to the 5 items you list...



> [*]Evade Rather Than Engage: single person and small group tactics choices


Evade is great on a patrol, but since my plans really center on bugging in, because I cant carry this much crap out, lol  Then evading becomes a lot more difficult. Because of things very specific to my location, I guess I could try to make it look like my house is already burned out and looted, not worth the look see to bother with it. There's even a book about that kind of stuff on amazon, but I dont know the title sorry.



> [*]Stealth: Silenced weapons methods (obey your state's laws in peace time)


This is very tricky, definitely obey your laws, and if you're someone who does other things that are of questionable legality or morality (grow your own pot maybe? something like that) when they raid your house, they are going to go bonkers when they find your silencer. And even if you just have all of the parts but are unassembled, I've heard tell of a law or a method of applying laws called "constructive possession" and as it's been described to me, having lets say... all of the parts necessary to complete a DIAS for your M4, but 3 are in the house and 3 are in the garage... NOPE, you have a fully automatic weapon even though in it's current configuration it's semi auto only AND despite the fact that the parts aren't even next to each other.

I've also been told that "Constructive Possession" can be applied to family members or friends. All they need to do is get a warrant and find some of the parts at your place, maybe some emails or texts that would lead a judge to believe that signing another warrant for your buddies house, or your moms or sisters (they'll never think to look there!!!) and boom! now you can all see the man together!

I will have to look into the specifics about this stuff, but I caution people, be REALLY REALLY REALLY careful when it comes to Class II builder, and Class III items controlled by the BATFE. Keep in mind, they have a history of not working and playing well with others, and that can all be very bad for you and your family.



> [*]Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance


Sounds great on paper, but there's a lot of people that simply cant pull the trigger on someone. Even when their own life is in jeopardy. Soldiers who are trained to fight, have been found dead without ever having fired their weapons. now the posit is that an armed citizen who probably never killed anything bigger than a snail or a gopher in their backyard will murder in cold blood a person... lets say for sake of argument, 200 yards away. There's no immediate threat to them, so thats going to make it hard for them, and unless that person is about to attack someone else they can see... I think a lot of people will hesitate and not take the shot (and then later that night, when the scumbag gets to their house, it will be an up-close and personal problem that they will wish they'd solved earlier at 200 yds, only now the scumbag has their kid at knife point)

It takes a lot to deliberately kill someone. It's one thing to talk about it, whether on the internet or even in person, it's not even a different ball game, it's not even the same sport; to actually look at them and then take the shot.



> [*]Proper weapons use: sexy infrared laser designators may get you killed


the more technology you rely on, the harder you fall and the more it hurts when it's not there anymore. That will be just as true when it comes to your day to day food and water sources as it is with defenses and fancy gadgets.



> [*]Training Methods: Prepper training VS. LEO & Military techniques


from my experience on forums and conversations, it's the opposite mindset unless you're talking about scavenging. LEO and Military (patrols) are focused on entry, and pacification. Preppers and Military (in position) are focused on defense and repelling attackers.

Generally speaking armor always loses the race to warheads, but you could have some really retarded meth-heads who want to rob and pillage and stopping them isn't going to be as difficult as a band of hardened criminals who have survived the first 3 months of the PAW by being locusts moving from one place to another consuming everything in their path.

Also, being that you have the home field advantage, a little knowledge and prepping in advance of a possible attack can go a long way. For example, there's nothing to say that you cant put a big bookcase right inside the entry way of the front door, WHAM!!! they kick in the front door... and .. hey, whats this doing here, while you now have a murder hole and they are momentarily standing still in the funnel of death. Sorry mister home invasion zombie, this was not the house you were looking for. Bang.

obviously this is just one example, but people will need to take every precaution they reasonably can when preparing for the worst from people who are possibly highly trained, armed and motivated to get inside to what you're trying to protect.


----------



## FrankW

Good analysis Dakine


----------



## Dakine

Thanks BlueZ! 

After reading the article I still feel pretty comfortable with my first assessment. On the other hand, unless people are willing to have this conversation not only with others, but truly with themselves, they may fail when they are tested. 

Also, I'd further caution people on Night Vision in states like Kommmiefornia. Although not a BATFE offense, Cal DOJ will still take a huge bite out of your ass if they find you with a rifle that has a night vision scope attached and I think *again I need to go double check this law too* that just having one that is weapon mountable is the same as having it mounted, even if it's in the closet still in the original packaging. 

Any state that is known to be hostile to 2A rights could easily have the same kind of laws in place. Now the example in the article with helmet NVD's and stuff like that... sure no problem. You're not a terrorist, you're a wildlife observer! But if that thing has a bracket to attach to a pic-rail. You're going to want to be really careful about that, and about sighting it in.

Just because you're at your private range and the guy shooting at the table next to you or 2 or 3 down, isn't wearing a badge, doesn't mean he isn't LEO and doesn't have the ability and authority to turn your world upside down if he feels like it.

Any optics, or other devices that you're going to prep for... be sure to have a lot of batteries, and some kind of solar charger + good brand name rechargeables would be great too. I need to keep looking, I haven't found one for 123 batts yet, but I've seen some nifty ones for everything from AAA all the way to D, and they really don't even cost that much either. I think they start around $35


----------



## BadgerPeak

Dakine,

"Evade is great on a patrol, but since my plans really center on bugging in..." If you are trained for it, you can evade while bugging in (seems illogical, but that's because mainstream training has failed to show you how).

Quote:
[*]Stealth: Silenced weapons methods (obey your state's laws in peace time)
"...if you're someone who does other things that are of questionable legality or morality (grow your own pot maybe? something like that) when they raid your house, they are going to go bonkers when they find your silencer." If you get caught growing pot in your house, nothing in my article can, or was ever meant to help you. For readers who follow the laws, silencer ownership is legal in over 36 states and making them (within the law) is legal in those same states.

Quote:
[*]Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance
"Sounds great on paper, but there's a lot of people that simply cant pull the trigger on someone... " No tactic will work for someone who isn't willing to use it. Are you suggesting we shouldn't teach effective tactics because some people won't have the stomach to employ them?


----------



## Dakine

Dakine,



BadgerPeak said:


> "Evade is great on a patrol, but since my plans really center on bugging in..." If you are trained for it, you can evade while bugging in (seems illogical, but that's because mainstream training has failed to show you how).


Well, that's certainly possible I guess, and I'm not going to ask you divulge the contents of what you're trying to do as a business for free on a forum post. Evading can be anything from a mindset of deliberately not making contact, to deliberately minimizing what the non-hostile neighbors or random passers by might assume are your capabilities based on what they are able to see from the outside looking in. If they see something that looks well maintained and protected, they might think it's worth getting inside to take a look... if that's what you mean, especially in an urban setting, yeah, I agree completely. Which I kind of alluded to with trashing up my yard to make it look like it's not worth the hassle of a looter coming to me, let them think there are better opportunities elsewhere without me making a lot of noise shooting them.

Quote:


BadgerPeak said:


> [*]Stealth: Silenced weapons methods (obey your state's laws in peace time)
> "...if you're someone who does other things that are of questionable legality or morality (grow your own pot maybe? something like that) when they raid your house, they are going to go bonkers when they find your silencer." If you get caught growing pot in your house, nothing in my article can, or was ever meant to help you. For readers who follow the laws, silencer ownership is legal in over 36 states and making them (within the law) is legal in those same states.


Right, and again, I do agree, the point I was trying to make is that people who are willing to play outside of the boundaries in one area, are susceptible to letting that blur other lines... this is not going to go well for them. If someone gets caught with an item like that and haven't jumped through all of the legal hoops, they will roast! but yes, as a legal item I think people should get them, I think people need to exercise their rights like this so that gov't stops pushing people around, but they better do it right or they wont like the consequences, and like I was saying, if they are sketchy in the first place, and something else brings the police knocking, it's just going to go downhill rapidly when it turns into a federal case and charges against them.

Quote:


BadgerPeak said:


> [*]Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance
> "Sounds great on paper, but there's a lot of people that simply cant pull the trigger on someone... " No tactic will work for someone who isn't willing to use it. Are you suggesting we shouldn't teach effective tactics because some people won't have the stomach to employ them?


no, I think training is good, but I also think people need to manage their expectations. If they dont get training on paper targets then they are definitely going to have a harder time, but 1 week of training on paper is not going to make someone the zombie killing, family protecting, thug slaying stone cold killah~ They're going to have to reach inside a little deeper than that, and it's going to take more than one class. Again, like I said, it's a discussion they need to have with themselves. Do they reasonably think they could be put in that situation, and can they make those kind of hard decisions?

Your class might be able to teach the average soccer mom how to be a great marksman, they'll be popping targets 300 yards out all day long... but they've got to be able to make that bridge from here's a person 300 yards away that is not an immediate threat, but if I dont do something based on imperfect information and supposition, they might try to kill me and my family.

Sucks... that's how it's been in other countries and I hope we never get there, but it's definitely possible.


----------



## BadgerPeak

Our evasion tactics are different than what you are talking about and have a different end goal, but changing the appearance of your home in one way or another may be useful too.

Surprisingly enough, getting someone to actually pull the trigger on another human being is accomplished much faster through training than through a change in mindset. A good prepper will work on both, but we revert to our training under stress, so most *properly* trained people will shoot when the time comes. The military has proven this, but it needs to be adapted to preppers or it will create fatal habits.

There are a number of requirements that training must meet to be effective, but that's my job to worry about, not the student's.

For what it's worth, I firmly believe in conventional training for the right audience, and we train police departments and soldiers in a more or less conventional way.


----------



## teotwaki

Excellent contributions Dakine! Besides making your house look like less of a jackpot here is another approach. Pick an abandoned house a little ways away and spruce it up a bit to look lived in. Haul in some non-functional solar panels, a bad generator and so on. Let the bad guys waste their time hauling that junk away. If you want to really seal the deal, booby trap the whole place and detonate it from a safe distance. eep:

Brian of Badger Peak

First off, thanks for the thought provoking article! We can all recognize familiar individual elements in it but when they are assembled into one treatise that is geared to prepping it takes on a life of its own. I see tht you have been working on these sorts of thoughts for a while:
http://badgerpeak.com/blog/Choosing-a-Scope-for-Sustainable-Daily-Living-Opinions-from-a-Sniper.html

I realize that you have some commercial aims for a book so I am not trying to impact those. Instead I believe that this discussion could greatly enhance any books or videos that you may release. With your foundation of conventional training for mainstream tactics I am sure that you could prepare some really great material that we'd all love to have a copy of.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis

Those bullet points are my bug out SOP. They certainly wont work for holding a defensive positiin but on the move by yourself they are necessary for suvival in my ooinion.


----------



## BadgerPeak

Teotwaki,

Thanks for starting the thread, and no worries about the book. These forums are free and available to everyone to share information. I realized in writing it that I wouldn't be able to provide much support or explanation for each point in such a short article.

My intent was for a discussion just like this, and like you mentioned, these discussions will be valuable in anyone's efforts to create training programs or literature for preppers  P.S. As a federally licensed manufacturer of high explosives, your comment about blasting the house from a distance brought a smile to my face and warmth to my heart:beercheer:

CrackbottomLouis,

I think you'll find that your bug out SOP, if employed creatively, will work very well for holding a defensive position. That's not how we're used to thinking, but there are dozens of reasons why conventional means of holding a position won't work for most preppers.


----------



## Dakine

teotwaki said:


> If you want to really seal the deal, booby trap the whole place and detonate it from a safe distance. eep:


Roaches check in, but they dont check out! I like it! :beercheer:


----------



## The_Blob

Sometimes I worry about how *easy* I think it could be to pull that trigger... hitting the target? :dunno:


----------



## dataman19

teotwaki,
Great article. Good observations. I enjoyed the reading.
I whole agree with the material.
Dakine,
Great critique.
I agree, pulling the trigger is not a natural thing - nor should it be.
As one who has been in this situation (24+ years of Federal Service - 3 Purple Hearts to back it up) I can safely say that I could pull the trigger, but I don't believe blasting your way through will ever accomplish anything.
..
BadgerPeak,
Good input. I totally agree that training is the key to survival. How many times have we heard the phrase "I don't need a Ham License, the FCC won't be around when SHTF" or "I don't need firearms training, I'll just keep shooting until the bad guys are either scared away or are all dead" - REALLY? Scared off? If all you are doing is waisting bullets, you are signing your own death warrant.
...
No amount of formal training will guarantee that a person will or can make the correct decision for all circumstances. The most you can expect from formal training is to "minimize the stupid actions/reactions". I am quite sure there will be comments about reality, but seriously - if you haven't been there, you don't know what the reality is. 
..
Just because somebody is shooting at you does not mean they can actually hit you. Of coarse, if "they are shooting at you - they may very well want to kill you - that is obvious". Too many people watch cop shows on TV and think that not shooting is a sign of weakness - when in reality it could very well be a sign of intelligence. Shooting aimlessly does not accomplish anything. Shooting in a rush/panic accomplishes less.
..
I think this has been an interesting thread. If nothing else, maybe it will open a few minds to the reality at hand.
...
Killing another human being should be a "last resort" scenario. I am not saying you should not be able to defend your own life, the lives of your family, nor be able to assist a neighbor/friend as well. I am agreeing that "pulling the Trigger on another Human Being" is serious - let the movies make it entertaining and trilling. But "please" realize that it isn't cut and dry.
..
A scenario/situation to ponder. Late night, you are alerted to some one moving outside. You get your gun and get ready. You hear them come through the gate and hear them at the front door. Or you hear them outside wandering around. Do you shoot? Think about this for a minute, the person hasn't demonstrated any "clear hostile intent" yet they are trespassing. So what if you do shoot them? Maybe they are wandering around outside trying to find a water hose to fill a water container (maybe their car radiator hose broke and they need water to replenish what they lost). Maybe they are hurt and looking to get first aid.
..
But then again they could just be the brain sucking zombies that everyone is warning you about.
..
So ponder this: If they are in fact milling around outside looking to attack - why are they making so much noise? If they are raiders they would most likely be sneeking up, not making a lot of noise.
...
I fall back on the statement: Taking another human beings life should be a last resort, not an automatic option.
..
Dave
Phoenix, AZ


----------



## teotwaki

dataman19 said:


> ----------SNIP-----A scenario/situation to ponder. Late night, you are alerted to some one moving outside. You get your gun and get ready. You hear them come through the gate and hear them at the front door. Or you hear them outside wandering around. Do you shoot? Think about this for a minute, the person hasn't demonstrated any "clear hostile intent" yet they are trespassing. So what if you do shoot them? Maybe they are wandering around outside trying to find a water hose to fill a water container (maybe their car radiator hose broke and they need water to replenish what they lost). Maybe they are hurt and looking to get first aid.
> ..
> But then again they could just be the brain sucking zombies that everyone is warning you about.
> ..
> So ponder this: If they are in fact milling around outside looking to attack - why are they making so much noise? If they are raiders they would most likely be sneeking up, not making a lot of noise.


Dave/Dataman19,

Hopefully there are enough physical defensive layers around your post SHTF house that lost souls cannot just wander up to the front door. Anyone determined enough to get by the first few layers of defense is much more likely to be a raider. I am sure that raiders that survive for a while will be crafty enough to send in someone under a false flag to scope out your defenses. They are also likely to accumulate explosives to use for frontal assaults.


----------



## FrankW

teotwaki said:


> Dave/Dataman19,
> 
> Hopefully there are enough physical defensive layers around your post SHTF house that lost souls cannot just wander up to the front door. Anyone determined enough to get by the first few layers of defense is much more likely to be a raider. I am sure that raiders that survive for a while will be crafty enough to send in someone under a false flag to scope out your defenses. They are also likely to accumulate explosives to use for frontal assaults.


I agree with all of your abovc statement except the last:
Explosives for frontal assault??????

This is not a "deathlands" novel as enteraining as they might be, where hordes of mutant armies ravage the landscape.

your "enemies" are going to be desperate normal people trying to survive.


----------



## Padre

So the article says: USE COMMON SENSE. 

Did we really need an article for that? I guess in this day and age we did! 

I admit they are good considerations. One issue I must take however is the long shot suggestion. Sure killing a man with a long shot, particularly if your weapon is suppressed, IS AWESOME. It reduces personal risk, and the emotional told taking a life can have, and can demoralize and defeat an opforce quickly, and mile(s) away from your family; but it seems that the author is guilty of exactly what he is warning us against. Sniper action is after all part of modern military training and doctrine, and may be a part of SHTF home defense but is certainly not going to be the norm, unless you have a very liberal Rules of Engagement (ROE).

IDEALLY it would be great if you could engage bad guys at 1000 yards, but here is the question, if the world is in turmoil are you really proposing that you shoot EVERYONE when they get within 3, 4, or 5 hundred yards of your home? Unless they arrive looking like the barbarian hoards how will you know at 1000 yards their intentions? Maybe they are refugees making their way home or looking for shelter? Just because they are BEARING ARMS doesn't mean they are enemies, I mean don't most of us believe in a God given right to bear arms? I do it all the time and have never shot anyone!

So you've gotta ask yourself what the ROE is going to be in a WROL situation? Where do you draw the line? How do you challenge interlopers? 

This suggest the real problem with weapons training today which is that most all weapons training deals with clear cut battle situations and considers victory the only possible out come. Certainly as he suggests if you are in a battle against superior forces standoff distance, concealment, and maneuverability will server you much better than a calvary charge on a machine gun nest, but perhaps running away may server you better than guerrilla tactics. The question is how do you determine if you are in a battle situation and how do you determine if its winnable? More over... what do you do if the odds are unsurvivable? 

One of the few useful ideas on the doomsday prepper series came from the crazy nut who was digging spiderholes all over his property. His idea was to bug out, and then come back and kill them all one by one at night. Seems extreme, but it is exactly that type of thinking that we will need if things go all mad max. We have to think as if every moment of life was potentially a battle between life and death, and yet try to live a semi-normal life despite this.

Fix positions, currently out of fashion in military doctrine is a tactic that is going to need to be revisited if you plan on defending a house (not a mobile home). That means OPs with snipers providing overwatch, but also medieval tactics such as: walls (as in Castle), and gates, along with moats, towers, etc. if practicable might be reconsidered. Also, I think we have to acknowledge the fact that, as my father used to tell me: "there is always someone bigger and stronger than you!" (that's saying a lot as I am an ox of a man). Running away, or strategically retreating as the military types call it, should be an option if you want to be a prepper who survives. In the middle ages villages who stood against invading barbarians often died to the man, woman, and child. However, those that cached supplies in the woods and scattered when enemies approached, though not very MACHO, were very alive, along with their unmolested children, and unraped wives.


----------



## teotwaki

BlueZ said:


> I agree with all of your abovc statement except the last:
> Explosives for frontal assault??????
> 
> This is not a "deathlands" novel as enteraining as they might be, where hordes of mutant armies ravage the landscape.
> 
> your "enemies" are going to be desperate normal people trying to survive.


If it were to be that any desperate people were just normal hungry neighbors from next door I would be happy with that. However, the predators in our current peaceful times will only become worse because there will be no rule of law to capture and punish them. If anything they will become much worse when fueled by hunger. Just look at the world right now.

The Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony has kidnapped almost 600 children over the past three years forcing some of them to kill each other and work as sex slaves. Kony - a self-styled mystic leader who was at one time determined to rule Uganda by the Ten Commandments has been on the run for a number of years.

In 1993 there were persistent stories of cannibalism in Bosnia that were never debunked as far as I know: http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1993/O...nnibalism/id-5f8d8c10e3e9797db33d7a6a18b19dee

Any number of the desperate people out there will be military trained in weapons and explosives and are likely to employ those skills to obtain food and other materials. Nothing to do with stories in novels but definitely based on human nature.


----------



## BadgerPeak

Excellent post, Padre, I'm in agreement with just about all of it.

Two considerations:

1. The distance shooting thing doesn't work well (for the reasons you mentioned, and others) if you are defending your home from the *inside*. In fact, defending your home from the inside bears very high risk to you and minimal risk to dedicated and reasonably intelligent attackers.

When possible, homes should be defended from the *outside*. Now apply the hunting rifle/scope concept. You are 250 yards off silently watching as they approach the house where your friends and family who aren't on guard duty are staying. If you have the ability to warn the occupants, you do. If the outsiders show hostile intent (shooting, hacking at the doors, etc.) you drop them. They are taking fire from the house and from you. Any cover they seek will protect them from one, but not both. You are safe because of your concealed position and your distance. As hard as it will be, eliminate the entire group. You don't need a surviving attacker to come back seeking revenge for his fallen brother.

None of this requires "sniper training" but better equipment and training will improve the results.

2. If you have the resources, and things drag on long enough, I agree that a modification of the castle idea (see how it's done with impacted earth in the Middle East) will be useful. 99% of preppers don't have enough resources to truly harden their homes, so I suggest we all learn tactics that will work without expensive luxuries like that.


----------



## teotwaki

Padre said:


> -------------snip------- Rules of Engagement (ROE).
> 
> IDEALLY it would be great if you could engage bad guys at 1000 yards, but here is the question, if the world is in turmoil are you really proposing that you shoot EVERYONE when they get within 3, 4, or 5 hundred yards of your home? Unless they arrive looking like the barbarian hoards how will you know at 1000 yards their intentions? Maybe they are refugees making their way home or looking for shelter? Just because they are BEARING ARMS doesn't mean they are enemies, I mean don't most of us believe in a God given right to bear arms? I do it all the time and have never shot anyone!
> 
> So you've gotta ask yourself what the ROE is going to be in a WROL situation? Where do you draw the line? How do you challenge interlopers?
> 
> ----------SNIP--------------


How about suggesting a set of ROE? 

The thread is drifting a bit with folks pointing our problems and offering criticism but please suggest solutions too. :beercheer:


----------



## BadgerPeak

I think rules of engagement will vary drastically according to a few things:


How bad did things get
Is law enforcement still in tact
Will they help you or prosecute you for defending you home
Are you in the city or country
Will you report the attack, or hide the evidence
What options do you have short of eliminating the attackers
Where do you draw the line between the immediate safety of your family, and fear of social/legal consequences

Each prepper will have a different set of answers to these and other relevant questions, so each prepper will end up with a different set of ROE to match his/her situation.


----------



## Padre

I agree with badger that home defense plans and ROEs will vary based on you circumstances. For me its simple, I refuse to murder a man because I am afraid, so I have a strictly defensive ROE.



BadgerPeak said:


> I think rules of engagement will vary drastically...
> 
> Each prepper will have a different set of answers


I can't give you a generic set of defense plans but here is what I think my rules would look like post-SHTF. In terms of the legal question its a non issue because a) my BOL is in the middle of nowhere, and b) because if I am willing to shoot, then they probably have already shot at me, and I would prefer to take my chances with a jury of 12 and most likely end up walking, than with a man or men who clearly intends to do me harm.

Situation: I have a house at the end of a long dirt road. Concealed from the road. There is a hill between my house and the road that provides it cover. The house is of modern fabrication and is definitely not hardened, so as TEOTWAWKI notes it is not a fighting position, if I can help it. There are alternate approaches, through miles of overgrown trails and rain run-offs, but I am 90% sure that threats, if they come, will come from the road. Behind my house I have a dirt road that leads to my neighbors 100 acres. I hope to have a dozen or so men and women to help pull security at my place. I also have a dozen neighbors who are for the most part well set up (as far as supplies), who I hope to enlist to defend our community. The community has three ways in and out for road vehicles, and any number for ATVs or those on foot.

So my thought is 4x three man teams for my home defense. One at the beginning of my drive way, one just off the crest of the hill, and one roaming the alternate approaches. The alternate approaches will be boobie trapped with various noise makers etc. to give us early warning. The 8 off duty members will be packing a rifle and side arm while they do whatever they are doing when not pulling security. There are a number of pre-planned firing positions with easy access from the house, most of them behind solid rock boulders.

The "gate" (which is really a telephone poll) will first alter the house via VHF radio, and then stop anyone coming down the road, inquire as to their business, from cover (I have a megaphone if necessary). The house will makes its way to firing positions while the rover takes up a rear guard.

The ROE will be simple: Stay quiet and out of sight, don't identify yourself unless a bogie is coming directly toward the homestead, don't fire unless fired upon.

If the person is a friendly they will be disarmed and escort to a shack out of sight of the house to talk with us, and then sent on their way if safe to do so.

If attacked we will defend from cover. Hopefully the two neighbors will come to add a little extra firepower and protect our flanks. If it looks like the odds are greater than 3 to 1 (or so) we might bug out via that back road or one of the overgrown trails (that I know like the back of my hand) into the bush with cover from a few of our best shots who will set up well back from the road, which will have obstacles, and with easy access to the 1000s of acres of wilderness behind my home.


----------



## mercygirl87

Dakine said:


> I know it seems upside down, and I will go read the article to see how that changes my opinions, but here's my first reaction to the 5 items you list...
> 
> Evade is great on a patrol, but since my plans really center on bugging in, because I cant carry this much crap out, lol  Then evading becomes a lot more difficult. Because of things very specific to my location, I guess I could try to make it look like my house is already burned out and looted, not worth the look see to bother with it. There's even a book about that kind of stuff on amazon, but I dont know the title sorry.
> 
> This is very tricky, definitely obey your laws, and if you're someone who does other things that are of questionable legality or morality (grow your own pot maybe? something like that) when they raid your house, they are going to go bonkers when they find your silencer. And even if you just have all of the parts but are unassembled, I've heard tell of a law or a method of applying laws called "constructive possession" and as it's been described to me, having lets say... all of the parts necessary to complete a DIAS for your M4, but 3 are in the house and 3 are in the garage... NOPE, you have a fully automatic weapon even though in it's current configuration it's semi auto only AND despite the fact that the parts aren't even next to each other.
> 
> I've also been told that "Constructive Possession" can be applied to family members or friends. All they need to do is get a warrant and find some of the parts at your place, maybe some emails or texts that would lead a judge to believe that signing another warrant for your buddies house, or your moms or sisters (they'll never think to look there!!!) and boom! now you can all see the man together!
> 
> I will have to look into the specifics about this stuff, but I caution people, be REALLY REALLY REALLY careful when it comes to Class II builder, and Class III items controlled by the BATFE. Keep in mind, they have a history of not working and playing well with others, and that can all be very bad for you and your family.
> 
> Sounds great on paper, but there's a lot of people that simply cant pull the trigger on someone. Even when their own life is in jeopardy. Soldiers who are trained to fight, have been found dead without ever having fired their weapons. now the posit is that an armed citizen who probably never killed anything bigger than a snail or a gopher in their backyard will murder in cold blood a person... lets say for sake of argument, 200 yards away. There's no immediate threat to them, so thats going to make it hard for them, and unless that person is about to attack someone else they can see... I think a lot of people will hesitate and not take the shot (and then later that night, when the scumbag gets to their house, it will be an up-close and personal problem that they will wish they'd solved earlier at 200 yds, only now the scumbag has their kid at knife point)
> 
> It takes a lot to deliberately kill someone. It's one thing to talk about it, whether on the internet or even in person, it's not even a different ball game, it's not even the same sport; to actually look at them and then take the shot.
> 
> the more technology you rely on, the harder you fall and the more it hurts when it's not there anymore. That will be just as true when it comes to your day to day food and water sources as it is with defenses and fancy gadgets.
> 
> from my experience on forums and conversations, it's the opposite mindset unless you're talking about scavenging. LEO and Military (patrols) are focused on entry, and pacification. Preppers and Military (in position) are focused on defense and repelling attackers.
> 
> Generally speaking armor always loses the race to warheads, but you could have some really retarded meth-heads who want to rob and pillage and stopping them isn't going to be as difficult as a band of hardened criminals who have survived the first 3 months of the PAW by being locusts moving from one place to another consuming everything in their path.
> 
> Also, being that you have the home field advantage, a little knowledge and prepping in advance of a possible attack can go a long way. For example, there's nothing to say that you cant put a big bookcase right inside the entry way of the front door, WHAM!!! they kick in the front door... and .. hey, whats this doing here, while you now have a murder hole and they are momentarily standing still in the funnel of death. Sorry mister home invasion zombie, this was not the house you were looking for. Bang.
> 
> obviously this is just one example, but people will need to take every precaution they reasonably can when preparing for the worst from people who are possibly highly trained, armed and motivated to get inside to what you're trying to protect.


At 200 yards the jury will have decided that you were able to run away and your ass will be in jail. I would think twice about that one.


----------



## teotwaki

mercygirl87 said:


> At 200 yards the jury will have decided that you were able to run away and your ass will be in jail. I would think twice about that one.


Jury in a SHTF situation?


----------



## Dakine

BadgerPeak said:


> I think rules of engagement will vary drastically according to a few things:
> 
> 
> How bad did things get
> Is law enforcement still in tact
> Will they help you or prosecute you for defending you home
> Are you in the city or country
> Will you report the attack, or hide the evidence
> What options do you have short of eliminating the attackers
> Where do you draw the line between the immediate safety of your family, and fear of social/legal consequences
> 
> Each prepper will have a different set of answers to these and other relevant questions, so each prepper will end up with a different set of ROE to match his/her situation.


I completely agree, the scenarios are so widely varied that accounting for even a *small* (edit: changed from *large*... oops!) number would be an immense piece of work.

I'd also add that any one of the scenarios you have listed above can instantly go from "yep, justifiable homicide" to "you cold blooded murdering cur, we're going to hang you and your family as an example" For instance... yeah, you shot and killed a zombie. Zombie wanna-be home invasion burglars name was Joe Blow, so what??? However... How were you to know he was the cousin/nephew/son/son-in-law/lover/??????? of the local sheriff/magistrate/regional army commander/??????? and now what started as self defense is grounds for summary execution. (in SHTF there will be cases of might makes right, and you don't want to be on the wrong side of that when they don't want to hear your side of the story.)

Worms gotta eat too, same as crows. (although Clint said it the other way around lol)


----------



## CrackbottomLouis

BadgerPeak said:


> Teotwaki,
> 
> Thanks for starting the thread, and no worries about the book. These forums are free and available to everyone to share information. I realized in writing it that I wouldn't be able to provide much support or explanation for each point in such a short article.
> 
> My intent was for a discussion just like this, and like you mentioned, these discussions will be valuable in anyone's efforts to create training programs or literature for preppers  P.S. As a federally licensed manufacturer of high explosives, your comment about blasting the house from a distance brought a smile to my face and warmth to my heart:beercheer:
> 
> CrackbottomLouis,
> 
> I think you'll find that your bug out SOP, if employed creatively, will work very well for holding a defensive position. That's not how we're used to thinking, but there are dozens of reasons why conventional means of holding a position won't work for most preppers.


The only way to hold a defensive position is to not be noticed or be considered not worth the effort (which I believe will eventually backfire as people get more and more desperate. There are places in South America where you can get killed for a small ziploc of glue for example). Maybe using these tactics to draw people away and thus remain invisable would work.


----------



## kappydell

good military tactics often are bad legal tactics. there is a BIG difference between war and civilian life, however grim the latter may become. you will have to defend/justify your decision to do what you did sooner or later. so consider your actions ahead of time very carefully. although it is indeed better to be tried by twelve than carried by six, prison sucks however you look at it. and the death penalty may make a comback as it becomes too expensive to keep prisoners for years & years....


----------



## BillM

Short of going to war in a military unit, I can't envision a situation wherein i would shoot someone at 100 yards away much less 300 yards away.

I can only imagine that would bring some major heat down on me and me or my famiely would likely wind up dead or in prison.

Regardless of the circumstances, I would not be defending myself or my home at that distance. I would just be a murderer.


----------



## Dakine

Padre said:


> I agree with badger that home defense plans and ROEs will vary based on you circumstances. For me its simple, I refuse to murder a man because I am afraid, so I have a strictly defensive ROE.
> 
> I can't give you a generic set of defense plans but here is what I think my rules would look like post-SHTF. In terms of the legal question its a non issue because a) my BOL is in the middle of nowhere, and b) because if I am willing to shoot, then they probably have already shot at me, and I would prefer to take my chances with a jury of 12 and most likely end up walking, than with a man or men who clearly intends to do me harm.
> 
> Situation: I have a house at the end of a long dirt road. Concealed from the road. There is a hill between my house and the road that provides it cover. The house is of modern fabrication and is definitely not hardened, so as TEOTWAWKI notes it is not a fighting position, if I can help it. There are alternate approaches, through miles of overgrown trails and rain run-offs, but I am 90% sure that threats, if they come, will come from the road. Behind my house I have a dirt road that leads to my neighbors 100 acres. I hope to have a dozen or so men and women to help pull security at my place. I also have a dozen neighbors who are for the most part well set up (as far as supplies), who I hope to enlist to defend our community. The community has three ways in and out for road vehicles, and any number for ATVs or those on foot.
> 
> So my thought is 4x three man teams for my home defense. One at the beginning of my drive way, one just off the crest of the hill, and one roaming the alternate approaches. The alternate approaches will be boobie trapped with various noise makers etc. to give us early warning. The 8 off duty members will be packing a rifle and side arm while they do whatever they are doing when not pulling security. There are a number of pre-planned firing positions with easy access from the house, most of them behind solid rock boulders.
> 
> The "gate" (which is really a telephone poll) will first alter the house via VHF radio, and then stop anyone coming down the road, inquire as to their business, from cover (I have a megaphone if necessary). The house will makes its way to firing positions while the rover takes up a rear guard.
> 
> The ROE will be simple: Stay quiet and out of sight, don't identify yourself unless a bogie is coming directly toward the homestead, don't fire unless fired upon.
> 
> If the person is a friendly they will be disarmed and escort to a shack out of sight of the house to talk with us, and then sent on their way if safe to do so.
> 
> If attacked we will defend from cover. Hopefully the two neighbors will come to add a little extra firepower and protect our flanks. If it looks like the odds are greater than 3 to 1 (or so) we might bug out via that back road or one of the overgrown trails (that I know like the back of my hand) into the bush with cover from a few of our best shots who will set up well back from the road, which will have obstacles, and with easy access to the 1000s of acres of wilderness behind my home.


Nice setup Padre, I wish I was that fortunate!

A couple suggestions... on the one road in, you might think about something to disable vehicles before they get to your outer perimeter. Depending on the length of the road, and any possible choke points, you could either use some kind of fabricated trap like pungi sticks and if you can place them right, they'll have next to no warning before they flatten their tires (this isnt ideal if you expect possible friends/family to come running in, especially if they are being pursued by zombies) Also, it's a lot harder to build a safe zone, or a way to intentionally render the trap safe temporarily... at least not without doing a lot of work.

And try as you might someone is going to forget the code words "always stay on the left side", and sure shit, Uncle Fred is gonna pop all the tires on his rig because he swears you told him stay away from the left side. Really you have no one to blame but yourself, Uncle Fred was always that way and you should have known better from the beginning. 

You could also string up concertina wire aka razor wire. Most people associate this with stopping people, and especially with stopping people from going over a fence or through a pass, but it also stops regular civilian type vehicles. Gets all spun up in the wheels and control mechanisms. I was trying to find a video link but didnt have any success, I know I've seen film of it before though, although there's a limited market for people who intentionally trash a car by running it through that stuff.

So depending on the space available, the communications available, and the specific scenario... you could have Uncle Joe screaming hell bent for leather straight down your road... Fred Jr grabs the razor wire on one side and pulls it over to the other, when the family is through, he replaces it and then seeks shelter in his spider hole. Now when the zombies come screaming through, their cars are screwed, they're exposed and out in the open... and about to be turned into swiss cheese!

Also, I'd recommend you make sure that those "noisemakers" don't turn into accidental forest fire starters. Most things that make noise like that rely on some pretty interesting chemical and/or pyrotechnic triggers. It would really suck having an awesome BOL and then it burns down because a deer tripped a signal flare or something like that.

Do you have Night Vision? especially if you snare a vehicle coming in, or someone pops one of the noise makers? If not, and they can be spendy, you might want to at least get 1 or 2 sets, and then everything that can be added after that gets divvied up among your various 3 man teams.

Defense is easier to plan because you know the terrain, but it's also a limiting factor because a competent enemy will deny you what you need or want, and then start chipping away at what you have.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis

BillM said:


> Short of going to war in a military unit, I can't envision a situation wherein i would shoot someone at 100 yards away much less 300 yards away.
> 
> I can only imagine that would bring some major heat down on me and me or my famiely would likely wind up dead or in prison.
> 
> Regardless of the circumstances, I would not be defending myself or my home at that distance. I would just be a murderer.


Its easier to remain anonymous from a distance. Not that I advocate such things but its true.


----------



## Dakine

BillM said:


> Short of going to war in a military unit, I can't envision a situation wherein i would shoot someone at 100 yards away much less 300 yards away.
> 
> I can only imagine that would bring some major heat down on me and me or my famiely would likely wind up dead or in prison.
> 
> Regardless of the circumstances, I would not be defending myself or my home at that distance. I would just be a murderer.


I can think of several.

It's SHTF, it's been a little bit and the unprepared have wandered off down the road looking for greener pastures as zombies are wont to do... and then one quiet Wednesday morning a marauding band of bikers moves in and decides they make all the rules, start shooting & raping anyone they see, maybe in that order, maybe not, and doing general 1% biker type stuff on crack because they know there's no ROL to stop them.

Well, from a few hundred yards away... I just might start adding chlorine to the gene pool. 180 grains at a time. Bring an M4 as a backup rifle besides a handgun though, eventually they'll figure out where you're shooting from. And some of them may rally for an attempt on your position, you're going to want more than a good sniper system when that happens.

or...

UN Troops are marching through town... I'm allergic to those blue helmets and that little tidy bowl emblem... makes my trigger finger itch something fierce. I hate it when that happens.

or...

a mob has decided that "redistribution of wealth" and "social justice" are their battle cries and their "human rights" as they achieve freedom from their oppression, and they're burning and pillaging their way through the surrounding neighborhoods. yeah... sorry zombies... buh-bye.

in SHTF scenarios any one if not all of those are not only possible, they may be likely, depending on where you live... and none of them may happen to you, but if/when they do happen to someone, I certainly wouldn't fault them for doing what had to be done.


----------



## LincTex

Just as an FYI...



Dakine said:


> Be sure to have a lot of batteries, and some kind of solar charger + good brand name rechargeables would be great too. I need to keep looking, I haven't found one for 123 batts yet,


I bought a CR123 battery charger on ebay, that uses 12 volt DC car/lighter plug input. It also charges other larger sizes, but CR123 is the smallest it will do.

I have not had a lot of success with the chargers that have a built in solar panel. Their output is "barely adequate" at best when new, and output voltage degrades rapidly as the solar cell clouds over due to exposure to the sun. I am going 12 volts only (or at least 12 volt capable with "included adapter") on all of my battery chargers.

I do not want to depend on 120 volt power or "the need to have full sunlight". If I can charge from a 12 volt battery, I can charge the batts even on cloudy days if the main 12 volt battery system is up to snuff and has any reserve left at all.

I have other means to charge my 12 volt system besides solar, but that's another thread.


----------



## Padre

Dakine said:


> Nice setup Padre, I wish I was that fortunate!
> 
> A couple suggestions... on the one road in, you might think about something to disable vehicles before they get to your outer perimeter. Depending on the length of the road, and any possible choke points, you could either use some kind of fabricated trap like pungi sticks and if you can place them right, they'll have next to no warning before they flatten their tires (this isnt ideal if you expect possible friends/family to come running in, especially if they are being pursued by zombies) Also, it's a lot harder to build a safe zone, or a way to intentionally render the trap safe temporarily... at least not without doing a lot of work.
> 
> And try as you might someone is going to forget the code words "always stay on the left side", and sure shit, Uncle Fred is gonna pop all the tires on his rig because he swears you told him stay away from the left side. Really you have no one to blame but yourself, Uncle Fred was always that way and you should have known better from the beginning.
> 
> You could also string up concertina wire aka razor wire. Most people associate this with stopping people, and especially with stopping people from going over a fence or through a pass, but it also stops regular civilian type vehicles. Gets all spun up in the wheels and control mechanisms. I was trying to find a video link but didnt have any success, I know I've seen film of it before though, although there's a limited market for people who intentionally trash a car by running it through that stuff.
> 
> So depending on the space available, the communications available, and the specific scenario... you could have Uncle Joe screaming hell bent for leather straight down your road... Fred Jr grabs the razor wire on one side and pulls it over to the other, when the family is through, he replaces it and then seeks shelter in his spider hole. Now when the zombies come screaming through, their cars are screwed, they're exposed and out in the open... and about to be turned into swiss cheese!
> 
> Also, I'd recommend you make sure that those "noisemakers" don't turn into accidental forest fire starters. Most things that make noise like that rely on some pretty interesting chemical and/or pyrotechnic triggers. It would really suck having an awesome BOL and then it burns down because a deer tripped a signal flare or something like that.
> 
> Do you have Night Vision? especially if you snare a vehicle coming in, or someone pops one of the noise makers? If not, and they can be spendy, you might want to at least get 1 or 2 sets, and then everything that can be added after that gets divvied up among your various 3 man teams.
> 
> Defense is easier to plan because you know the terrain, but it's also a limiting factor because a competent enemy will deny you what you need or want, and then start chipping away at what you have.


Good advise, but I've done a pretty thorough eval of my defenses and I have most all bases covered. Quite frankly once I get there I don't plan on using my vehicles much so I plan to fell a few pines in the road and make the road look impassible (at least without considerable effort) to an on road vehicle. I have also looked into tire shredders, but don't like the idea because of the danger posed to friendlies (taking out someone's tires might be pretty cruel without the possibility of resupply!).

I had thought about the noise makers and had a few non-pyro ideas, but am open for more suggestions.

I have some gen 1 NVGs but would love to get my hands on a Gen 3. Too expensive for now.


----------



## teotwaki

I'll try to recap a bit based on the discussion so far


*Evade Rather Than Engage*: single person and small group tactics choices will apply when out on patrol from your BOL or if you are on the road or trail while bugging out. If you are in your BOL then "evade" can vary based on your BOL's characteristics. A low-profile or "abandoned" look may help you to evade attention from looters. Modest to robust defenses may help you to evade exposure to a physical attack where the attackers have greater numbers. IIRC, military doctine specifies that attackers must have a 3-to-1 advantage against a well defended position. Good defenses may include outposts to provide both observation and interlocking fields of fire.

*Stealth: Silenced weapons & methods* (obey your state's laws in peace time) Suppressed weapons may help to lower your profile whether you are hunting or eliminating attackers. Also train for camoflage and concealment techniques for your area's country, urban or city environment.

*Distance Shooting: engaging from a distance* Train now so as to have the skill in your bucket of tools. Legal issues may or may not matter depending on how extensive the breakdown of society is. Even without the Rule Of Law, careful identification of targets, a threat asessment and sticking to the moral high ground are steps to take before squeezing the trigger.

*Proper weapons use: sexy infrared laser designators may get you killed* Purely military weapons and tactics would be inappropriate for post-SHTF survival. Ammunition resupply or other support will be unavailable. Small unit tactics and guerilla techniques and hunkering down would be more applicable.

*Training Methods: Prepper training VS. LEO & Military techniques* This needs more discussion. The LEO/Military techniques rely on a large amount of external support such as logistics, resupply and extensive transport. A prepper may have a mix of training for defensive tactics, stealth and evasion, small unit & guerilla tactics, combat pistol techniques, distance shooting, shooting & weapons accuracy to conserve ammunition, knife fighting, field expedient but practical fortifications for yur current abode (timber, rammed earth, caltrops, physical barriers made from abandoned cars, etc.)


----------



## kappydell

in SHTF scenarios any one if not all of those are not only possible, they may be likely, depending on where you live... and none of them may happen to you, but if/when they do happen to someone, I certainly wouldn't fault them for doing what had to be done.[/QUOTE]

that is what the legal system uses voir dire for, to remove guys from the jury pool. not right, but they do it anyway. im just sayin, sooner or later it will have to be justified, and jury nullification, as much as I like it, is systematically being eliminated by the courts.


----------



## Dakine

kappydell said:


> in SHTF scenarios any one if not all of those are not only possible, they may be likely, depending on where you live... and none of them may happen to you, but if/when they do happen to someone, I certainly wouldn't fault them for doing what had to be done.
> 
> that is what the legal system uses voir dire for, to remove guys from the jury pool. not right, but they do it anyway. im just sayin, sooner or later it will have to be justified, and jury nullification, as much as I like it, is systematically being eliminated by the courts.


This is why more people like US must be on the jury. Too many people want out of the process, I know,I get it... it's a lot of your time, it's a lot of wasted time because it's usually some scumbag up for his bazillionth arrest.

Who do you want in the jury box? 12 guys like us, or 12 like "them"? what if you could only have ONE of us, would that be at least okay?


----------



## teotwaki

If the SHTF happens I suspect the "jury" will be a lynch mob or a bullet in the back of the head. Anyhow, that jury stuff is way off topic and should go in another thread. 

LincTex, thanks for the "like"! These discussions really help me take a number of seperate ideas and see how they interrelate and if they are worthy of a write up. Without knowing I was a "prepper" I have been one since I was a pre-teen wondering about the Soviets nuking us.  In this forum the chance to kick around ideas with like-minded folks is invaluable.

On-topic: TRAINING

In my last post I realized that knife-fighting or other edged weapons use was worthy of consideration. There may be other threads where weapons training has been hashed over. Feel free to direct me to the good ones and I'll also search the forum. I'll try to distill a bit and invite further discussion as needed.


----------



## teotwaki

*Training related threads*

Some of these may not really be about "training" but have good info. Otherwise I have not found a real thread devoted to prepper training pre-SHTF.

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/shooting-win-gun-fight-not-trophy-11004/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/i-see-lot-about-guns-what-about-hand-hand-3062/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/defense-vs-bugging-out-12812/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/walking-stick-self-defense-8691/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/question-about-security-post-collapse-10994/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/when-bullets-scare-11588/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/i-see-lot-about-guns-what-about-hand-hand-3062/

http://www.preparedsociety.com/forum/f23/quick-what-would-you-do-7058/


----------



## Dakine

I've only had the opportunity to go to one shoot event, unfortunately the calendar conflicts with my EMT classes for a couple more months. The one I did get to go to was a LOT of fun, and I highly recommend it to anyone of any shooting level experience.

Here's the IDPA website http://www.idpa.com/ and they believe that anyone should be able to get into this kind of shooting and training with a minimal outlay of expenses. including the gun, someone should be able to start at around $5-600

pistol
minimum of 3 magazines (or speed loaders for revolvers)
a pistol holster
a magzine holster, or 2 if you get the kind that only hold one mag each
a vest or over-shirt to conceal the pistol
100-200 rounds of ammo depending on which kind of event you're shooting

That's it! pretty basic stuff but lots of hands on with some skilled professionals around. I cant wait to get back into those this winter!


----------



## BadgerPeak

Here is an excellent discussion for those who think the average person can't be taught to actually take another human life through proper training. Grossman is *THE* authority on the psychology of killing, and his book is required reading for our students.






In fact, it's so possible that it's happening to many people on accident!! Proper training in conditioned responses will have an almost 100% success rate even among housewives and other "unlikely" candidates.

It's not about getting them to make such a difficult decision, it's about removing the decision process altogether.


----------



## teotwaki

BadgerPeak

Thanks for sharing the video and the pointer to the book! I thnk that I will watch the video a second time when I can do so at home where it is quiet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Kil...l_Cost_of_Learning_to_Kill_in_War_and_Society

http://www.amazon.com/On-Killing-Ps...352136638&sr=8-1&keywords=killing+by+grossman


----------



## BadgerPeak

No problem! On Combat is his second book. It contains much of the same information as On Killing, but with an emphasis on how the information should affect how we train. If you'll read both, do. If not, On Combat is the better book.


----------



## Wolf1066

Some interesting and lively debate.

I would think things would have to break down pretty far for ROE to include long-distance shooting.

The Tueller Drill justifies the use of Deadly Force at 21 feet, a distance that can be crossed by the average person in under 2.5 seconds, turning a man with a bat 7m away into a person beating you to death in short enough order to constitute a "clear and present danger".

The Lethal Force Institute under Massad Ayoob (author of _In Gravest Extreme_) repeatedly makes the point that any use of lethal force must be demonstrably "self-defense" against a clear and present danger.

This is also reiterated by Marc "Animal" MacYoung on his site wherein he devotes pages to the "self defense" issue and how people can quickly come unstuck by contributing to the escalation of the conflict (making it a fight, not self-defense) or showing signs of pre-meditation.

I would think that even the suggested scenario - wherein you know that the people are hostiles due to the fact that you are watching your house from a safe distance and they are actively attacking those within - is legally problematic from the standpoint of *premeditation *as evidenced by the fact you set yourself up in a sniper's blind with long-range weaponry and lay in waiting for a target to present itself.

It's hard for a jury to see that as any different from arming yourself and laying in wait for someone at the local parking lot.

The links to Grossman were very interesting but he patently has no idea of the animal kingdom or the nature of violence within it.

Many animals kill their own kind - something he is obviously in denial of in order to push his pet theory that humans are "biologically predisposed to avoid taking another human's life".

His theories also fly in the face of observable natures of humans wherein many will happily kill another to prevent something as intangible as "loss of face" and the long and bloody history of humans actively facing each other at arm's reach and killing each other in particularly brutal fashion.

His theory that the likes of Alexander just engaged in shoving matches until one side ran away and were slaughtered shows a complete lack of knowledge of historical European fighting techniques with swords etc - wherein the main tactic was to try to kill the other as fast as possible without him hurting you at all... nothing like the lengthy Hollyweird flashy and showy swordfights where every thrust carries the chance that you could be wounded.

He would be well served to read MacYoung's site and see the nature of human violence described and explained by one who grew up around people who'd happily kill you for failing to give "props."


----------



## BadgerPeak

Wolf1066 said:


> ...I would think that even the suggested scenario - wherein you know that the people are hostiles due to the fact that you are watching your house from a safe distance and they are actively attacking those within - is legally problematic from the standpoint of *premeditation *as evidenced by the fact you set yourself up in a sniper's blind with long-range weaponry and lay in waiting for a target to present itself.
> 
> It's hard for a jury to see that as any different from arming yourself and laying in wait for someone at the local parking lot.
> 
> The links to Grossman were very interesting but he patently has no idea of the animal kingdom or the nature of violence within it.
> 
> Many animals kill their own kind - something he is obviously in denial of in order to push his pet theory that humans are "biologically predisposed to avoid taking another human's life".
> 
> His theories also fly in the face of observable natures of humans wherein many will happily kill another to prevent something as intangible as "loss of face" and the long and bloody history of humans actively facing each other at arm's reach and killing each other in particularly brutal fashion.
> 
> His theory that the likes of Alexander just engaged in shoving matches until one side ran away and were slaughtered shows a complete lack of knowledge of historical European fighting techniques with swords etc - wherein the main tactic was to try to kill the other as fast as possible without him hurting you at all... nothing like the lengthy Hollyweird flashy and showy swordfights where every thrust carries the chance that you could be wounded.
> 
> He would be well served to read MacYoung's site and see the nature of human violence described and explained by one who grew up around people who'd happily kill you for failing to give "props."


Wolf,

Every state in the union has laws allowing for self defense (liberal states have more liberal laws but they still have them), *and* every state has laws allowing for the defense of another.

Premeditated defense is not premeditated murder. If you put up a razor wire spool along the top of your fence and a thug gets all cut up by it, did you premeditate cutting him up or did you just have a very secure fence? If a local jury would fault you for the fence, MOVE, and if a local jury would fault you for using *ANY* tactic or *ANY* amount of force against armed intruders attacking your family inside their home...MOVE!

If you cannot move, defend your family anyway. You should prefer life in prison to letting your family get slaughtered any day, and this tactic is the most likely to succeed in the greatest variety of scenarios.

To your comments about Grossman:

The entire US law enforcement community and the entire US military community has great respect for Grossman and his work, and rely on his expertise to influence training, counseling, and even tactics. *They* consider him to be *the* foremost expert on "killology".

I don't know your background. Do you have more knowledge about war and killing than our military and cops put together? If you have training or experience that rises to the level that you are qualified to question the very foundation of the world's foremost expert on the matter, I am genuinely and respectfully willing to hear it. That is not a trite comment, I am genuinely interested.

A few specifics from your post: Your words in blue.

Grossman is not "in denial" that animals kill their own kind...he knows that happens. He stated that they have a natural aversion to it...and they *do*. I have a natural aversion to hard work, but I do it because it is necessary. Animals have a natural aversion to killing their own kind, but will do it in the right circumstances.

"_His theories also fly in the face of observable natures of humans wherein many will happily kill another to prevent something as intangible as "loss of face" and the long and bloody history of humans actively facing each other at arm's reach and killing each other in particularly brutal fashion._" The video clip *very clearly* points out that humans can overcome this natural aversion quite effectively through certain "training" methods, including by accident when playing video games, watching movies, etc. (this would include longheld societal pressure/custom of killing to save face) Saving face by the way is a HUGE deal in eastern cultures, so while we don't see it that way in the West, they aren't killing over a small issue.

_"His theory that the likes of Alexander just engaged in shoving matches until one side ran away and were slaughtered shows a complete lack of knowledge of historical European fighting techniques with swords etc"_ Do you really think the world's foremost expert on human conflict doesn't realize that European wars were fought with swords? Really??? He isn't saying that swords weren't used. He is saying that the two front lines might be fighting with swords, but everybody behind is shoving. Ever been in a big tight moving crowd? The only way for those in the rear to participate is to push forward, and it is only those very few in the front that have any contact with the enemy. Watch a video of police fighting a large riot. The few at the front may be using spray or batons, but the rest just push.

I'd suggest reading his book, _On Combat_. His findings are supported by mountains of evidence, and the proof is in the pudding. When we train warriors using the lessons taught by Grossman, they accomplish much more and have far less mental trauma afterwards.


----------



## Wolf1066

BadgerPeak said:


> I don't know your background. Do you have more knowledge about war and killing than our military and cops put together?


It would appear that I don't need to - my expertise in _other areas _should lead the entire US military to accept my ideas without question. After all, Grossman's expertise in psychology ensures that they do not question his judgements on biology and anthropology.

Grossman's conclusions about there being an inherent *biological *aversion to intraspecies killing refute years of biological and anthropological studies and Grossman's works have been heavily criticised by biologists and anthropologists for their inaccuacy _on biological/anthropological matters_.

I have absolutely no doubt that in matters of psychology, especially where overcoming resistance to killing and post-killing trauma are concerned, Mr Grossman is the top in his field and I completely agree that his works have great merit and any training based on his psychological conditioning would be very efficacious.

However, his expertise in _psychology _does not mean that his conclusions on _biological _imperatives are correct - but they don't have to be as the conditioning/training he advocates works just as effectively from the assumption that our aversion to killing others is *societal *in origin.

Studies of animals in the wild show they have no aversion to killing their own kind and a number of experiments conducted on average people who thought that they were going to deliver a lethal electric shock to a subdued prisoner clearly showed that a significant number of them had no aversion to it, either.

Grossman's contention that there is a biological aversion to intraspecies killing is fundamentally flawed, but his psychology is sound and useful.


----------



## BadgerPeak

If there are parts of his work that bother you, don't let that stop you from reading his book and learning the valuable information he offers.

I happen to not like his position on violent video games and movies, but I don't let that stop me from carefully considering and learning from his research. 

We can both agree that he isn't always right about everything. Ignore the bad, apply the good, and drive on


----------



## BillM

Grossman, is right about human aversion to pulling the trigger on another human being.

I have previously stated that the basics of self defence are being ready , willing and able.

The most important of the three is "willing".

Most people will hesitate and that is what differentiates the dangerous from the civilized.

It is the diffrence between a sociapath and the adverage Joe.

You have to condition your self to act when faced with certin stimulious and not to act when the approprate stimulious is not there.

It is not enough to tell yourself , if my famiely was threatened I would use deadly force. You must be conditioned to fire the weapon instantly when the threat becomes imminate.

You won't have time to think it over and make a reasoned decision it will be an instinctive decision or you will be dead.


----------



## teotwaki

Howdy BadgerPeak!

Progress report on the book?

Thanks!
.
.


----------



## BadgerPeak

teotwaki said:


> Howdy BadgerPeak!
> 
> Progress report on the book?
> 
> Thanks!
> .
> .


We were making good progress until the recent school shooting and subsequent pending legislation. Since then, my time has been pretty well consumed with trying to maintain our gun/ammo related inventory.

We've been getting some good input from members of the Special Operations community, but as always, the trick is figuring out which parts apply to a prepper's situation.

If I'm honest about the timeframe, I expect we're still a few months out.


----------



## Dude111

Its a good article,in my opinion ALMOST ANYTHING MAINSTREAM is crap!! (Alternate ways are much better)


----------

