The OODA Loop and Negative Outcomes – Part I

Proverbs 26:17 English Standard Version (ESV)

Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.

In rejecting the Lansdale man’s appeal, a judge wrote Storms thinks he is ‘some type of hero that injects himself into certain situations.’

Our Decisions usually determine our Outcomes as I’ve mentioned in a previous post. Many, if not most, of our decisions are made ahead of time. When we make the same decision repeatedly over time, that is obviously the case. If we have made bad decisions ahead of time, the likelihood we WON’T select that decision from our list of options is minuscule.

As the Appeals Court noted in its Decision on the case:

Appellant discussed [in his sentencing statement] three different occasions in which he “interjected [himself] into a circumstance which could have caused [his] death to save others.”

If the Boyd’s OODA Process applies anywhere in the tactical decision-making context, the predispositions of ‘Genetic Heritage’ and ‘Cultural Traditions’ in the Orient Phase must be considered. Those two components are key in determining whether we will make the correct decisions in real time.


The terms Heritage and Traditions indicate we are most likely dealing with subconscious processes in that context. It’s especially important to note that the Legal system is, at best, only peripherally interested in Heritage and Traditions. While heroism is sometimes applauded in the media and politics, it generally isn’t in the courts. As Lieutenant Seymour said in Billy Budd:

we do not deal with justice here, but with the law.

6 responses

  1. If this was the decision of the courts then the courts are full of BS. If laws do not delivery justice then why bother with them?

    1. He did everything wrong by the numbers. It was almost like he sat around thinking about the best way to go to prison.

      1. I can understand your point of view. Its the one embraced by the people who allowed Kitty Genovesse to meet her fate.

        They made the right decision according to the law.

  2. It sounds as though it was his pattern of behavior that was the most problematic. Though it MIGHT have turned out differently IF he had some empty-handed skills, pepper spray, or even experience in assertiveness communication (though professional experience as a mental health therapist would have been the most useful thing to have in that situation, it seems). But, luckily for me, one can’t just shoot someone for being a loudmouth jerk. At the point our hero intervened, I’m sure the congregation was unsure of how to respond to the aberrant and disruptive behavior of the victim, and this uncertainty must have caused a great deal of stress and consternation among everyone present, but no one’s life was ever in jeopardy. Justice was served.

  3. The Hero showed the fellow pew sitter a ‘Commonwealth of PA CCW badge’, none exist in the real world, obtained on the internet and revealed he was armed. This is why we cannot have nice things!

  4. Reblogged this on disturbeddeputy and commented:
    Be humble. Not a Rambo.

%d bloggers like this: