Home defense in non-permissive environments...

[Yogimus]

So, somehow, growing up on a ranch, butchering, castrating, hunting, etc prepared me for killing a-holes?

I could see that, maybe, for soldiers, where you may have to kill someone whom you don't nec. view as evil, but I don't see a doubt between "killer/robber/rapist" etc, and "someone who needs to die."

When those idiots were trying to carjack me, I really, really, wanted them to just go away, but I decided at what point I was going to fire, and I don't think I was going to suddenly change my mind.

Generally speaking, humans have innate safety-stops in their psyche which prevent them from causing true harm to others. (example I gave for the dog being an extreme case of this) The vast majority of the population is incapable of recognizing this, let alone overcoming it with training. You can test this hypothesis by asking your buddy to punch you as hard as he can, in the gut when he is sober, then once more when he is drunk.

Now if you accept this hypothesis as fact (as it is)http://philosopherinthemirror.wordpress ... -tells-us/ you must then realize that it translates over to self defense (which it does) which means that a direct force weapon, like a bat, is useless in untrained hands. You are simply introducing a weapon into a bad situation.

Self defense through the use of physical force weapons takes just as much training, OR MORE, as firearm training. This is why I recommend switch activated weapons such as pepperspray, or tasers. (Or guns where applicable)

I understand AND RESPECT that the argument of "Bringing a gun to defend yourself will only get you shot" is a flawed one, but in this instance it holds true. Just my $.02, the pooch thing is an example of that ingrained reaction, not a method I would actually recommend (Although it would be an extremely effective exercise)

[Netpackrat]

I fail to see the connection between hurting a harmless dog, and killing some SOB who needs it.

Dogs are not harmless. Every one of them is potentially a loaded weapon.

[Termite]

As I keep saying... unless you train yourself to hit people, you will not be able to do it when the time comes.

Go to kennel, get a medium/large sized dog, and ask her to [strike]hit[/strike] kill it as hard as she can.

This.

What Yogi is talking about is what my good friend has suggested I force EDT to do, to prove she deserves her S&W Airweight w/Crimson Trace grips.
I don't have a problem with it. I've killed multiple stray dogs, and feral cats are like rats to me. I've never actually shot another human(but I've been shot, an accident), but I'm one of the few people in my circle who has actually cut someone else in self defense. Yes, I've actually used a knife in anger.

What Yogi is telling you is good advise.

[Termite]

I fail to see the connection between hurting a harmless dog, and killing some SOB who needs it.

And yet it is still there.

Indeed. It's really about being "cold enough around your heart", to actually do it.

[Aglifter]

Generally speaking, humans have innate safety-stops in their psyche which prevent them from causing true harm to others. (example I gave for the dog being an extreme case of this) The vast majority of the population is incapable of recognizing this, let alone overcoming it with training. You can test this hypothesis by asking your buddy to punch you as hard as he can, in the gut when he is sober, then once more when he is drunk.

So, police don't seem to often have a problem hesitating to fire - does their training involve being desensitized?

And, too many of my friends are former jocks - both skilled, trained, and used to hurting people - I have no desire to be hurt by them, deliberately. I've felt nothing but joy seeing friends/turned opponents loaded into ambulances. I admit, sports are full of rules, but I don't remember being bothered about hurting opponents.

Now if you accept this hypothesis as fact (as it is)http://philosopherinthemirror.wordpress ... -tells-us/ you must then realize that it translates over to self defense (which it does) which means that a direct force weapon, like a bat, is useless in untrained hands. You are simply introducing a weapon into a bad situation.

Self defense through the use of physical force weapons takes just as much training, OR MORE, as firearm training. This is why I recommend switch activated weapons such as pepperspray, or tasers. (Or guns where applicable)

Maybe. I was planning on heading to Argentina, to hunt pigs w. knives, and I was a bit worried about the emotional effects of that. My brother was elated when he killed a 12' tiger shark w. a knife.

I certainly understand that contact weapons take more skill and strength.

I understand AND RESPECT that the argument of "Bringing a gun to defend yourself will only get you shot" is a flawed one, but in this instance it holds true. Just my $.02, the pooch thing is an example of that ingrained reaction, not a method I would actually recommend (Although it would be an extremely effective exercise)

Maybe its a farmboy thing... Maybe it comes from being raised that you hit brothers in one fashion, and level, but that strangers don't receive the same courtesy...

[Greg]

Maybe its a farmboy thing... Maybe it comes from being raised that you hit brothers in one fashion, and level, but that strangers don't receive the same courtesy...

What Yogi is pointing out is very real, and applies to the majority of the population. However there are exceptions.

Growing up on a farm is indeed a remarkably good way to desensitize you to killing, you get rather matter-of-fact about it. You have to, if you want to survive and not starve, or let your family starve. (I've had this conversation with people who grew up on farms.) As an aside, this is one of many ways that farm boys tend to make better soldiers.

There are other ways to get ordinarily people to where they can hurt/kill others with their own muscle power (with or without tools) but it doesn't just happen.

[Yogimus]

So, police don't seem to often have a problem hesitating to fire - does their training involve being desensitized?

I could show you HOURS of youtube footage that prove this to be a false premise. And yes, police get trained to shoot through desensitization type classes. (interactive video, simunitions, person targets, not silhouettes, etc.

[Jericho941]

So, police don't seem to often have a problem hesitating to fire - does their training involve being desensitized?

It depends. At least one has found out the hard way that, when you're being shot, the most effective response is not to continue screaming "drop the gun" and "stop."

[Termite]

So, police don't seem to often have a problem hesitating to fire - does their training involve being desensitized?

Regarding LEOs:
While there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing involved, it is also a matter of "you represent the law", ie authority, that is taught to LEOs.

With regards to soldiers:
De-humanizing the enemy is a common training technique.
Look at the old posters from WWII. Often the Japanese were shown as buck-toothed, squinty eyed individuals, who were just barely human. Rumors were intentionally started that they ate human babies.

Ag, regarding the young lady in question. Get a live chicken. Have her kill, dress, cook, and eat it. If she can do that, I'd say there's a good chance she'll use lethal force to defend herself.
And unlike killing a dog from the pound, killing/eating the chicken is perfectly legal everywhere.

[Greg]

So, police don't seem to often have a problem hesitating to fire - does their training involve being desensitized?

Regarding LEOs:
While there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing involved, it is also a matter of "you represent the law", ie authority, that is taught to LEOs.

With regards to soldiers:
De-humanizing the enemy is a common training technique.
Look at the old posters from WWII. Often the Japanese were shown as buck-toothed, squinty eyed individuals, who were just barely human. Rumors were intentionally started that they ate human babies.

And you STILL have a hard time getting soldiers to actually use their weapons.