That Guy
Without fail, every time I see an article from any reputable self-defense instructor, “that guy” is going to show up. It doesn’t matter if it’s me, Dimitri, Thompson, Martin, Hockheim, Miller, Christensen, or McCann. Just doesn’t matter because the twat is going to make an appearance.
Who Is That Guy?
He’s the guy who, despite the post, blog, or article being about UNARMED self-defense, will chime in with, “I just use my – insert name of a gun here.” Another favorite is the “I use Glock-fu” or “they won’t try that shit on me when they’re looking down the barrel of my – insert name of a gun here.” Here is an actual quote on a recent post advertising our classes “I will opt for concealed carry, 357 (sic) mag wins every time.”
The Problem
Where do I begin with what exactly is the problem with these jackasses?
1. You’re giving gun owners a bad name because everyone else reading it realizes you’re a twat, and they associate your twat waffling with gun owners. Stop.
2. Your comment is as much use as a chocolate teapot. Yep, you haven’t contributed to the conversation or article in any meaningful way at all. All you’ve succeeded in doing is coming across as an ill-informed blowhard who’s clearly insecure because you have to bleat about your big bad gun at any opportunity.
3. You’re wrong. To make matters worse, you don’t even know you’re wrong. Read on for why that is.
Why You’re Wrong
Fights happen in bars every single day. I know because I’ve bounced in them in five different countries. Most are caused by girls, spilled beer, ego, or a combination thereof. So, there you are when you turn and bump some guy trying to leave the bar with his eight precariously balanced glasses. They spill on him. He’s mad. He punches you. You’re in a fight. This is where that guy pulls out his concealed 3.57 mag and shoots him dead, right? Sorry, skip. Not legally defensible nor justifiable. In most States, you are breaking the law if you are even carrying concealed in a venue that serves alcohol because guns and alcohol rarely mix well.
Other Places You Can’t Carry
Rather than go into detail about all the other places you can’t carry, why don’t you explain to us how that would have worked for you on the day of 9/11 if you were on the plane fighting the hijackers? How about if you were visiting New York, New Jersey, Maryland, D.C., California, or Chicago on business? All places where your concealed 3.57 mag (that wins every time) can’t even be carried. What about other countries that don’t permit the ownership of weapons? Have you possibly considered that maybe the post is directed at people who live there? It’s not all about you ‘that guy.”
Why Can’t It Be Both?
Why do pontificating windbags like you guys assume it’s always an either/or situation? “I don’t have to know how to defend myself because I always carry concealed.” Why is it beyond your shallow intelligence to figure out you can do both? People like Greg Ellifritz and Kelly McCann are somehow capable of knowing both how to handle themselves with and without weapons. So, incidentally, do most members of every single special forces unit in the world. From Spetnaz to the SEALs and the Foreign Legion to the SAS, they all learn to shoot AND do hand-to-hand combat. Maybe you should be letting them know the empty hand bit is unnecessary.
The Force Continuum
Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with something called the force continuum, you big bad gun owner you. It’s basically a scale that labels levels of aggression with appropriate levels of response. Make note of the word “appropriate.” It starts at “Psychological Intimidation” and goes up the ranks from there. Next is “Verbal Insults & Threats,” then comes “Passive Unarmed Resistance,” then “Active Unarmed Resistance,” then “Armed Aggression,” which some break up into impact, bladed, and projectile weapons. The corresponding levels of response go from “Officer Presence” to “Verbal Commands” to “Control and Restraint” to “Unarmed Active” and so on all the way up to “Deadly Force.” Your continuum, it would seem, has only one level of response which is “shoot ’em with my concealed 357 mag that wins every time.” Good luck with that in court.
Do Us All A Favor.
Do us all a favor. Next time you see a post about martial arts, MMA, self-defense, karate, ju-jutsu, Krav Maga, etc., just shut the f**k up.
PS: Now I’m going to go find a gun forum where they’re debating 9mm vs. .45 and post, “I just use my elbows. Wins every time.”
Nick,
Good description of “That Guy”! Essentially he’s a one trick pony that is either delusional about his single tool, or is too lazy to learn how to use any other.
I would like to comment on the “Force Continuum” as it applies to non-law enforcement or professional (paid) security personnel. It is my understanding that the average American Citizen has no legal obligation to tailor his use of force to either match, or exceed by a single point on that continuum, his assailant’s level of force, as it is for law enforcement and security. The standard for justified use of lethal force in every state is the threat of death or grave bodily harm. (Of course, proving one’s case in court is another matter.) While it is best to have a wide array of tools at our disposal in a violent encounter, some unarmed combat students may be burdened with calculations about the “appropriate” level of force they’re allowed to use, instead of emerging alive from the encounter.
Your thoughts?
Mark
I believe you’re correct mate re the force continuum. I still maintain it’s good advice for unarmed combat because there is a charge (at least in the Westminster system of justice) of “excessive force” that can be leveled against you.
PS: Thanks for taking the time to reply by the way.
I agree to some extent, but as with most things, this also depends. In some states if you have a degree in martial arts (which usually means black belt, which is sometimes available with only 2-3 years casual training) and you engage in hand-to-hand combat you’re considered to be using a deadly weapon. And that means you still need to have in mind some scale of appropriate levels of force as you would with a firearm to protect yourself from legal, as well as physical harm.
I have an advanced martial arts degree, but if given an option I’d prefer to use pepper spray, both because I’m less liable to be held accountable for use of deadly force and because it really does present a lower chance of causing serious damage than hand-to-hand. That’s something I had to think about and which I’ve prepared for; if I hadn’t thought about the ramifications of it I wouldn’t be prepared to even have the option.
But regardless of the level of training someone has, if the goal is to be able to use it in any real-world scenario, then some consideration should be given to when you’re justified in using those skills and when you aren’t (though something as granular as the use-of-force scale may not be necessary). Although this consideration should be part of any good martial arts instructions, it sometimes isn’t covered or emphasized enough, so people who train need to spend time thinking about it before something happens, so they don’t overreact when the real world happens.
I’m a fan of Gary Spiers from meeting him in Australia and he was my reality check to the BS in martial arts back in my day, just found Mick Coup, Lee Morrison and now you Nick. Ditched Tony Blauer recently (there are alotta ‘snake oil’ salesmen in this sphere eh?) Awesome content, thanks for your service.