The Cost of Killing Redux
#fridayfundamentals
I’ve written about the Cost of Killing several times. https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2016/07/24/the-cost-of-killing/ Even to someone who is involved but not the shooter, it’s incredibly hard on people.
Here’s yet another sad example.
I-Team: St. Louis family demands answers after double homicide case went from murder to self-defense
Note that the story begins with “Eric and Arron Smith were gunned down following a domestic violence incident,” as if they were innocent victims of a senseless shooting.
A précis of the incident is that a violent domestic abuser and his violent brother, Eric and Arron Smith, were shot and killed in self-defense by the victim’s sister’s boyfriend. The sister had stashed the abuser’s pistol in her purse when the rescue party arrived. The abuser’s brother arrived with his own pistol, beat one of the party with it, and gunpointed the rescuers. At that point, the victim’s sister took the abuser’s pistol out of her purse and gave it to her boyfriend. The boyfriend then shot and killed both the abuser and his gunpointing brother. The boyfriend was arrested, charged with Murder, and placed in Jail with no bond.
The prosecutor subsequently hid evidence from the shooter’s defense attorney. When this was uncovered by a Grand Jury and judge, the charges were reduced to Manslaughter, and the shooter was released on bond. Fourteen months later, shortly before trial, all charges were dropped.
The saddest part of the entire affair is that a few days before the trial was to begin, the sister who gave the gun to her boyfriend to protect the rescuers committed suicide. The shooter’s defense attorney didn’t want to speculate why she did that.
“We don’t know what occurred that led her to take her own life.”
Having been a party to the killing of two men she knew and then having to recount all the details in court is a good guess as to why.
“We weren’t trying to start any problems, we were just trying to help my sister,” she told the POlice.
RIP Kaylee Castro
Surveillance Detection Principles
#walkbackwednesday
In the April 1996 edition of the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin https://leb.fbi.gov/file-repository/archives/april-1996.pdf/view , Supervisory Special Agent John C. Hall wrote:
“Realistic training does not state general platitudes and then leave officers to figure the rest out for themselves. It provides clear principles to govern the application of deadly force and then illustrates appropriate application through practical examples.” – p25
This could be paraphrased for Private Citizens as:
Realistic [education] does not state general platitudes and then leave [Citizens] to figure the rest out for themselves. It provides clear principles to govern [personal protection] and then illustrates appropriate application through practical examples.
Therefore, let’s consider Surveillance Detection. Surveillance Detection is a preemptive action that we can take to prevent getting into ugly situations at all. The following story is a reminder of its value.
Woman shot in the face in ambush as she’s followed home from store
https://news.yahoo.com/woman-shot-face-ambush-she-153809301.html
“Investigators say the women were driving home from a neighborhood market, and as they pulled into the driveway, they noticed a vehicle had followed them , KTRK reported.
A man got out of the vehicle and fired a single shot, striking the woman in the face, police told the outlet.”
There’s more to this story than stated in the article but that’s irrelevant in the educational context. These are some ‘clear principles’ and ‘practical examples’ of how to perform surveillance detection.
Principle 1
The time to notice that someone is following you is NOT when you turn into your driveway/parking spot as you a sitting duck. You should be aware of their presence long before then.
Look in your mirrors at least three times during turns as you drive home. All three times should be before you make the last turn onto your final approach, i.e., the street you live on. If you see the same vehicle behind you three times, you may have a problem.
Principle 2
If someone is following you, DON’T GO HOME. Or any other place where you will be a sitting duck either. One comment on the article was to go to a POlice station. Especially in the days of officer shortage and defunding the POlice, this isn’t a good idea. Call 911 and keep driving. If you’re in a ‘Hands-free’ State, maybe a POlice will pull you over and then you can explain why you’re on your phone. That should solve the problem right now. Other ideas are in this post. https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2023/09/29/surveillance-detection-after-a-confrontation/
As this poor woman found out, “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they are NOT out to get you.”
If you like my work, please consider supporting me on Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/TacticalProfessor I post a lot of content there that doesn’t go on my blog.
Los Angeles Citizen’s CCW Taken Away
L.A. homeowner who fired on armed robbers has concealed carry permit suspended
https://news.yahoo.com/l-homeowner-fired-armed-robbers-055345708.html
It’s as plain as the nose on your face that this is retaliation. For what, you may ask?
Embarrassing the authorities on public media. Just that simple. His incident demonstrated that he was capable of protecting himself and his family at the moment of crisis and the authorities were not. By talking to the media, i.e., the local news and Colion Noir, he rubbed that fact in the faces of the Law Enforcement Agencies responsible for his and his family’s protection.
One of the benefits of belonging to a self-defense legal organization such as the Armed Citizens’ Legal Defense Network https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/ is getting to talk to someone about the incident in a confidential manner. Regardless of what organization or attorney you contact, they will undoubtedly advise against giving statements to the media. They are going to tell you to not make public statements.
After any such incident, it’s a natural desire to want to talk about it to decompress. Doing so is probably emotionally healthy. What we want to do is accomplish our decompression in a format that won’t hurt us. Talking to a lawyer is a non-harmful format. Talking to the media, even if they are neutral or well-intentioned, is fraught with hazard.
Couching your criticism with comments like “the LAPD is understaffed” or the like is equivalent to “Bless their hearts.” Then saying you’ve hired a private detective to investigate, which is tantamount to saying the authorities are incompetent, is only throwing more fuel on the fire of their future discontent. And please don’t publicly say that the investigation was sloppy, even if that’s true. NO BENEFIT. That’s just venting. Vent to your attorney not the local news.
As we can see in this incident, the authorities are not going to take kindly to a gunowner publicly proclaiming that it was the Second Amendment and not the authorities that protected them. In States that only issue Licenses To Carry because of Bruen, they’re going to look for some way to get even. Law Enforcement administrators in those States are not your friends. Don’t poke them in the eye by publicly exposing their inability to protect you.
Having to interact with the authorities after an incident is a Negative Outcome.
In its statement to KTLA, the sheriff’s department did say that Ricci’s CCW may immediately be reinstated as long as he has followed all the required policies, such as “proper notifications” and “use of [a] properly documented weapon.”
The Sheriff’s Office’s definition of “immediately” may be somewhat different than ours. Having to jump through a bunch of bureaucratic hoops to reinstate your Right to protect yourself is an undesirable interaction. Don’t put yourself in that situation, regardless of how righteous your incident was. In this case, his attackers are still out there and I wish he could carry his piece.
Attempted Home Invasion in LA
https://abc7.com/los-angeles-homeowner-fights-back-armed-robbery-home-invasion-ccw/14016199/
As reported in The Armed Citizen blog http://graphics.nra.org/armed_citizen/ac_136.html from the NRA, which is well worth subscribing to.
The surveillance video is instructive. Note the ‘chase instinct’ in play. After the homeowner gains the upper hand by pulling his gun and firing, he chases after the intruders instead of going inside, locking the door, establishing a blocking position, and then calling the POlice.
This incident demonstrates a worthy addition to Don’t Go Outside http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=18502 to our Personal Protection pre-planning. Get Inside As Soon As Possible is the flip side tactic.
Tend To Your Own Business
#fridayfundamentals
Tend to your own business
the Assassin
That’s a sage comment the Assassin made while he and I were talking years ago. His comment was about the perils of intervention. I had my own experience with it a couple of days ago and learned some important lessons about the entire concept.
While at a large retailer, I observed a low level criminal teaching his son how to be a vandal. The criminal was not merely watching but was actively guiding his son through the process of how to vandalize the inside of the store. The boy was about ten years old. It was clear that he was being groomed in a similar way to the youth who tried to rob one of my University professors many years ago was being taught the trade of robbery by his uncle.
The criminal and his son were right next to me and the brazenness of the criminality surprised me so I reflexively asked them to stop. The criminal immediately threatened me for saying something about their criminal act. At that point, I realized he was a seasoned criminal and my conscious mind took over so I withdrew.
Upon reporting the incident to the store’s management, they asked me if he was still in the store and if I could point him out. The criminal and his entire family were only two aisles away so I indicated who he was. The manager and a security person asked me to step away and then they went over to speak to the criminal.
A few minutes later, they came back to me and said there was nothing they could do even though he admitted committing the vandalism. Further, they said they were not even going to ask him to leave the store. I pointed out that he had threatened me, to which they said since it hadn’t been a physical battery they wouldn’t be able to do anything about it and the local POlice wouldn’t even respond to a call.
Rather than choosing to stick my head further in the lion’s mouth, I immediately left the store. As a precautionary measure, I took a Surveillance Detection route [Surveillance Detection post] home. Although a remote possibility, I didn’t want to a take a chance on the criminal deciding to follow me to escalate the situation.
Lessons from the incident
First lesson. It takes two or three seconds to make a conscious decision. As soon as things began to escalate, my conscious mind kicked in and I decided to withdraw. Before that, I had been acting reflexively as most decent people would; i.e., “Please don’t commit crimes in my presence.” I said it despite the fact that I have been preaching about the perils of intervention in criminal acts not involving ourselves for well over a decade.
Second Lesson. The incident was clear example that Boyd’s Process [link to OODA category] is not about making decisions in the moment. Boyd’s best work, the Aerial Attack Study [link] is about not only making decisions in advance but also formulating a plan for how to implement the decision. My plan now is to immediately turn on my heel and walk away from such a situation. This replaces my previous and more nebulous idea of “don’t get involved.”
Third Lesson. It is extremely unlikely that the benefactor of an intervention will appreciate it or even support the intervention. It’s just not worth it. As a fellow student commented to me years ago:
“What is the benefit? NO BENEFIT!”
Falah Al-Mutairi
Shoot Yor Guns
#wheelgunwednesday
Before he passed away, the late Paul Gomez made a post about “Shoot Yor …. Guns.” This story is an example of why shooting your guns is important.
A couple of years ago, a colleague brought me her friend’s gun to fix. The friend said she had tried to shoot a coyote in her backyard one afternoon and the gun wouldn’t fire. It was a moderately used Model 64 Smith & Wesson revolver that had been gifted to her by a relative.
When I unloaded it and snapped it, everything seemed okay. There were three different kinds of ammo in it but none of them had a primer strike. The hammer nose protruded through the recoil shield properly so I took it to the range and fired it. It worked fine.
As it turns out, she had never fired it and didn’t realize a revolver has a heavy trigger pull. Her assumption was that the trigger pull was so heavy because the gun was broken. I cleaned it, put some proper ammo in it, and gave it back.
Just as well it didn’t fire because she lives inside the city limits of a municipality where shooting is prohibited. Unloading a cylinder of .38s probably would have brought the POlice, along with at least a citation. Also, although Georgia allows coyote hunting year-round, a hunting license is required. So it might have become a Department of Natural Resources game hunting issue. Coyotes can only be shot on your property without a license if they are attacking, which this one was not.
Moral of the story: don’t assume your gun works or that it will work for you until you’ve fired it. It’s also good to know the law about shooting animals, which is not as simple as people think. That’s true regardless of whether the animal has four legs or two.
Click on the image below for more information about shooting two legged animals.
Setting Ourselves Up for Failure
Chicago TV news crew robbed at gunpoint while filming a story on robberies
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/chicago-tv-news-crew-robbed-020000583.html
“Common sense is not a flower that grows in everyone’s garden.”
A friend’s comment about many people’s critical thinking skills
When I lived in Chicargo, several of my friends moved to the Wicker Park neighborhood because it was both trendy and convenient. One of the first things they did when I went to visit was to show me the guns they had bought. The guns were all pistol grip shotguns because at that time Chicargo didn’t allow any new handguns to be registered. Citizens who wanted to be armed just bought shotguns instead; so much for the efficacy of gun control.
Although it’s easy to poke fun at folks like the news crew that was robbed, they are far from the only people who are oblivious to dangers they place themselves in. People unthinkingly do it every single day.
While talking at The Home Depot with a friend who is an Assistant Manager there, she spotted two men walk out the door while carrying something but didn’t stop at the cashier. Her reaction was to run out the door after them. It turned out that they had legitimately done an exchange at the Service Desk and weren’t stealing. When she returned to where we were talking, I was nowhere to be found.
She looked around and saw me standing behind a display wall. When we started talking again, the conversation changed to a different subject.
Her: “I thought I had pissed you off while we were talking.”
Me: “No, I was just taking cover in case they started shooting when you chased them.”
Her: “I never thought of it but I guess that was a possibility.”
Me: “There are more killings and shootings at Home Depot than is generally known.”
I mentioned to her about the recent killing in the Florida Home Depot of a young woman by the father of her child. https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/escambia-county-home-depot-shooting Two bystander employees were wounded during the murder. She hadn’t even heard about it. Not long before that an Asset Protection officer was shot and killed at a California Home Depot while chasing a thief. https://abc7news.com/pleasanton-home-depot-shooting-blake-mohs-worker-killed-suspect/13161846/
“It’s not the bullet with my name on it that I’m worried about, it’s the one marked ‘To Whom It May Concern’ that scares me most.“
Army saying
Needs to have better aim – Redux
A recent Yahoo story was about “Chicago rideshare driver with concealed carry license shoots 2 robbers who stole his cellphone, fired at him” https://news.yahoo.com/chicago-rideshare-driver-concealed-carry-012004396.html . Some of the comments were simply congratulatory or expressed relief the driver wasn’t injured.
But being a story posted on Yahoo, it naturally included many responses by simple-minded Internet Common Taters to the effect of :
“He needs to improve his aim. Two cons could have been taken out.”
I’ve written about this before. https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2016/07/24/the-cost-of-killing/
There are three aspects of this incident worth mentioning; sociological, tactical, and marksmanship. The sociological aspect is covered more than adequately in the post linked above. The tactical aspect relates to the object of the exercise of Personal Protection. What we are trying to achieve is covered in my series about Breaking Contact. https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2021/10/27/breaking-contact-part-6/
The marksmanship aspect is something that clearly these potato heads have never considered past ‘maybe’ popping off a box of ammo at an indoor range.
Trying to get even a decent sight picture on a criminal who is threatening you near your driver’s side car door is almost impossible. Try it sometime with your inert gun and the difficulty becomes immediately obvious.
The only really good way to learn it is by using a SIRT pistol and a cardboard target on a stand outside the door. Those are resources very few people have. Even if they did, finding a place to practice it is difficult. Your neighbors and the POlice will not be very enthusiastic about you practicing this way in public. Nor will the Board of Directors of your gun club be happy about such a useful exercise at the club.
So I wish the potato heads would cut the Ride Share Driver some slack. He forced a Break In Contact, wasn’t injured, and didn’t have to interact with the Criminal Justice system excessively. That’s a win.
Reliability Testing – Part II
Continuing on with “How many rounds would you say make up a legitimate ‘reliability test’ for a pistol?”
This is a comment to the 2023 post that echoed a comment I failed to notice and answer on the 2017 post.
“ ‘One of the mathematical analyses presented in the original Facebook discussion was that 5 malfunctions per 1000 meant more than one malfunction in a 17 round magazine (8.72%).’
You need to link to this math because it isn’t correct if you assume independence.”
Here is the person’s explanation, verbatim.
“Claude – 5 in 1000 is a 0.5% failure rate, or a 99.5% success rate per shot. The odds of shooting twice in a row is 99.5% X 99.5%, or 99.5% to the 2nd power. The odds of shooting 17 rounds with no problems is 99.5% to the 17th power, or 91.8%, leaving an 8.2% chance of failure.”
The problem is that the assumed 0.5% failure rate was the result of shooting twice. So double counting the failure and then raising it to the 2nd power is an inherent structural flaw in the analysis. I don’t claim to be a statistician but occasionally a structural problem in constructing a mathematical analysis will be immediately obvious to me. If the output of a mathematical analysis is obviously divergent from reality (Glock 17s do not average more than one malfunction per magazine), it means the math is flawed in one way or another.
What is the reliability of a Glock 17? During one class I was teaching at the elite Rogers Shooting School, I had two failures to go into battery with the Gen 2 Glock 17 I used as my School gun. I pushed the slide closed with my thumb (OMG, a diagnostic malfunction clearance) and went on with the drill. The malfunctions seemed odd to me because they were out of the ordinary. Upon further reflection, I realized the teaching season was nearly over (October) and I had neither cleaned nor lubricated the gun all year. It had fired, with various types of ball ammo, somewhere upward of 15,000 rounds without a malfunction. The other School guns performed similarly.
An analysis that determined a Glock 17 had a probability of one malfunction per magazine flew in the face of my experience. That’s the kind of thing I keep an eye open for. If an analysis doesn’t match up with a broad segment of reality, there’s probably something wrong with the analysis.
Having built a model rocket does not make you a rocket scientist.
Home Invasion – Part II
and that’s the first time I realized how difficult it was to try and remove somebody’s testicles by hand.
The gentleman was very angry that his wife and homestead had been attacked and he had been shot at.
He used a 6 inch revolver to shoot back. No results, unfortunately.
And with that I went back to retrieve my own firearm. So I went to the vehicle. I had a handgun, a 38 special with a 6 inch barrel.
Quite an amazing and educational story.
Part I https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2023/06/17/home-invasion-part-i/
tacticalprofessor 
You must be logged in to post a comment.