Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After Zimmerman: Lessons for a Citizen Carrier
American Thinker ^ | August 1, 2013 | Paul Jacobson

Posted on 08/01/2013 12:18:23 AM PDT by neverdem

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: libstripper

Excellent points. I’ve CCW’d since 1974, after being robbed/shot, and am also thankful I’ve never had to use it.

I’d rather have it and not need it, than not have it and need it.


21 posted on 08/01/2013 8:39:26 AM PDT by Carriage Hill (Guns kill people, pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk & spoons make you fat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Re: “Lessons for a Citizen Carrier”

Just one lesson.....

If you shoot someone while defending yourself, your cooperation with the Police must COMPLETELY STOP after you have provided them with all legally required information.

Then, as calmly as possible, tell the Police you will be making no more statements until you have legal representation.

Then, calm, polite, and total SILENCE.

Most states require the same information.....

Name, birth date, Social Security number, home address, home phone, and, often, employer address and work phone, or school address for students.

Remember - defending yourself against a criminal is only 50% of the problem.

If you shoot the criminal, you must now defend yourself against a criminal justice system, and possibly a jury, that may be deeply prejudiced against White people and private gun ownership.

Sometimes the Police are your friends.

And sometimes, they are NOT.


22 posted on 08/01/2013 11:20:45 AM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Years ago, Jeff Cooper delineated the “Color Code” and the “Principles of Personal Defense” in an effort to provide us with a logical model for one’s thinking on the subject of mental preparedness. I’d like now to go to the next step and apply the same logic to the issue of personal appearance and demeanor, as we all agree that, in the domestic defensive environment, avoiding a fight is preferable to winning one.

Layer One: Nonattendance. The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is:
Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places. Don’t associate with stupid people. Don’t do stupid things. This is the advice I give to all students of defensive firearms. Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the “penalty” for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable.

Crowds of any kind, particularly those with an agenda, such as political rallies, demonstrations, picket lines, etc are good examples of “stupid places.” Any crowd with a high collective energy level harbors potential catastrophe. To a lesser degree, bank buildings, hospital emergency rooms, airports, government buildings, and bars (particularly crowded ones) fall into the same category. All should be avoided. When they can’t be avoided, we should make it a practice to spend only the minimum time necessary there and then quickly get out.

“A superior gunman is best defined as one who uses his superior judgment in order to keep himself out of situations that would require the use of his superior skills.”

Layer Two: Functional invisibility. We all need to practice to art of “being invisible.” It is in our best interest to go our way unnoticed, both by potential predators and by the criminal justice system alike.

Whenever I travel, particularly to foreign countries, I endeavor to be the one that no one notices; no one recalls; no one remembers. I silently slip through the radar, leaving no trace, a nameless, faceless tourist. When in any public place, I try to be clean and well groomed, but I never wear bright colors, any kind of jewelry, or anything shiny. I smile a lot, but talk softly and as little as possible. As we say in the law enforcement business, “Courteous to everyone. Friendly to no one.”

Loud talking, bright colors, Rolex watches, etc will consistently accumulate unwanted attention. On the other end of the spectrum, tattoos, poor grooming, loud and offensive language, a slovenly appearance, etc will also garner unwelcome notice.

Layer Three: Deselection. Any successful predator has the ability to quickly screen potential victims, focusing in on the ones who look as if they will make good victims and rejecting those who either (1) look too strong for expedient victimization or (2) don’t conveniently fall into any particular category.

When invisibility fails, we need endeavor to be consistently deselected for victimization. We do this by making it a habit to appear alert, uninviting, self-confident, and strong. At the same time, we never loiter or appear indecisive. We are always in motion.

“Weakness perceived is weakness exploited!”

Layer Four: Disengagement: Our best interests are not served by any kind of engagement with potential predators. Successful disengagement involves posturing, bearing, verbalizations, and movement. It is in our best interest to disengage at the lowest reasonable force level, but we must simultaneously be prepared to instantly respond to unlawful force with superior force.

Potential predators, as they attempt verbal engagement, should be politely dismissed. Bearing and eye contact should always project strength and confidence. We should continuously be moving off the “line of force.” We should be observant in every direction, giving potential predator duos and trios the distinct impression that they will not be able to sneak up on us.

When predators are confused, they are unable to focus sufficiently to carry off their victimization. Therefore, never let a potential predator seize the agenda. Don’t answer his questions, and don’t stay in any one place very long.

Disengagement, separation, and exit are our immediate goals when we have been selected or are being seriously evaluated by predators. However, if there is to be a fight, the best one is a short one. If a predator menaces me with a gun or a knife, I know that, before it is all over, there is a good chance that I will be shot or cut. However, within that prison of circumstance, I also know that the faster I can end the fight, the less hurt I’m going to get! If there must be a fight, I must explode into action, moving smoothly and quickly, in an effort to confuse and overwhelm my opponent before he has a chance to process all the information I’m throwing at him.

Ultimately, we must “have a plan.” Potentially dangerous encounters must be thought about in advance. Decisions must be made. Skills must be practiced. Confusion, hesitation, and vacillation will always attract the attention of predators and simultaneously stimulate predator behavior.

- John Farnam


23 posted on 08/01/2013 12:40:21 PM PDT by TurboZamboni (Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Of course you’d have to quickly judge about witnesses and such.

Do it in the wrong part of town --Trayvon's Miami neighborhood or Rodney King's -- and it'd be game over. You'd get an O.J. jury and they'd give you the same treatment that the black jury gave those Detroit cops in the Malice Green case.

The prosecutors failed to make their case against the (white) cops and the sole white juror voiced doubts .... and as he told ABC News later on Nightline, eleven pairs of black eyes swiveled around and radar-locked on him. Then the delivered their message: Change your vote to convict these cops, or else.

Media: No comment. What issue? What trial? Nightline was the only MSM venue even to display a pulse on that one.

24 posted on 08/01/2013 1:07:25 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
Oh, and this happened at about the same time as the O.J. trial, iirc.
25 posted on 08/01/2013 1:08:39 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni
Layer One: Nonattendance. The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is: Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places.

Hey! That's segregation -- that's raciss!! </s>

Don' be dissin' us, creepy cracka! Come on down heah, an bring you roll.

And your sister, too.

26 posted on 08/01/2013 1:13:36 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni

Good advice for the computer/chairborne warrior.


27 posted on 08/01/2013 5:24:09 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus sum -- "The Taliban is inside the building")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson