I like Yeager. I like him better when he cusses.
For those of you that carry on a regular basis. The video Im posting is from James Yeagar, some hate him, some love him. I will remain un-biased at this point. When I train with Him, I will make my choice then. However, in this video he is spot on.
I like Yeager. I like him better when he cusses.
De-escalate? Certainly, if you can depend on the bad guy breaking off his assault once given the money, wallet. There was an 89 year old gent about 10 miles from here, who was robbed... gave up his money, then was shot and killed.... for $10. The shooter was caught, and expressed aggravation that the elderly gent had ONLY $10. Anybody know how to get to your money, and your gun at the same time, or do you trust the robber to "only" rob you because you reached for your money instead of your gun?
I will attempt to de-escalate by expressing the desire that folks leave me alone. Depending on the situation, I may express that desire twice. That's it.
Not bashing anyone just making a statement.
As has been stated there are no absolutes in any given situation. Everything can go perfectly with no one hurt and all of a sudden something snaps and the bad guy starts shooting or the bad guy is violent and uncontrolled and in the end simply walks out.
We as individuals have to decide what is a satisfactory ending to each situation without letting pride and ego get in the way. If we are determined that the bad guy leaves in a box then we will look at whatever he does as justification for shooting. If our personal goal is to let the situation play out with the end goal the bad guy leaves, with or without cash or whatever, but no one hurt then we will tend to look at things in a different way.
As an example, someone breaks into your home. Let's just say that your state law says you have no duty to retreat, cannot be sued or held liable in anyway and you are justified in shooting simply because he broke in. You see the person across the room, from a position of cover you draw a bead and without warning shoot and kill him. Legally you are covered no harm, no foul so to speak even though he is 16 and unarmed.
Same example except from a position of cover you issue a verbal warning to him. He surrenders and says "Man just let me leave" you let him back out of the house, call 911 and let the police catch him outside or you command him to get on the ground which he complies with and the police arrest him in your living room without a shot being fired. The situation is all in your hands to a point. If the bad guy even at gunpoint decides to do something stupid then take whatever action is needed at that time remember you are going to react to what he does.
Personally I would do everything I could to de escalate the situation without firing a shot however I would be prepared to take whatever action needed to protect my life and those around me.
It depends on how any particular individual defines a "threat". In my opinion, to quantify a "threat" in the "heat of the moment", is a rare ability. Most break-in's, or assaults are quite fluid. "Planning ahead" would be great if one could cover all the possibilities, but one cannot.
"I'm gonna do this or that" is great conversation, but in any sort of training, YOU KNOW that unless you fall down, you quite likely won't get hurt. In a threatening encounter OUTSIDE of a training situation, you cannot predict what you'll do until you get there. I truly hope nobody has to find themselves in a shooting situation.
That being said, Yeager makes good points on trying not shoot someone. I am of the belief that if it can end without someone having to die, then I will do that. Sometimes you cannot, and you will have to end the threat. If you have to end the threat do it with greater violence and prevail. The most important part of our training should be our mindset and that we can manipulate all day...
Once someone uses violence on me or mine, the time for talking is over. I will de-escalate when possible. That being said, when it is game on, I will engage and overwhelm them. The trophy for second place is a granite marker.
Agree with him to a certain extent. He makes good points and brings up alot of good stuff.
But alot of it is black and white thinking. A scenario such as a mugging or crime in progress has too many variables to generalize a response. Thats why you see things like "shoot first ask questions later" as a popular response to a self defense situation.
I like the example another poster, usmcj, brought up with the old man. A robber may shoot you anyway, not to mention that by letting this criminal go, they will go on to victimize another person who they may choose to kill.
Like I said, black and white thinking, theres alot of factors that go into play having a general response plan I think is necessary but you should emphasize that it is adaptable (think Bruce Lee JKD). I would advocate in general you should be on the slight aggressive side to things like this. Being PROACTIVE keeps you alive and living well, being REACTIVE leaves you at the whim of others will.
Not disagreeing or trying to sound callous but if using the reasoning for deadly force as they will go on to victimize someone else probably would not save you in court.
Once the immediate threat to you and yours is over what the bad guy coulda, woulda might have done is not a defense. I absolutely agree that being somewhat aggressive is the way to go.