Taking a Stand.

I sense a theme. The inimitable LawDog cautions us to practice and carry as the most important part of one's decision to go armed; and the world's most dangerous librarian recounts a recent situation where someone got inside her comfort zone. These two individual posts were crying out to be put together. Now, I'm just a chimp banging away at an old IBM selectric typewriter compared to Breda and LawDog, but I'll give it a shot.

Both posts bring up incredibly important aspects of self-defense. They both point out the importance of having the proper mindset, which Breda demonstrates aptly in her tale of the boor of the bar. She maintains an excellent balance between overt aggression and meek submission, using body language only to send the unmistakeable message that messing with her would be to the other person's detriment. LawDog reminds us that all the hardware in the world is meaningless if the software can't execute the program; that you can have the most uber tacticool blastomatic in the world's most deadly caliber, but if it's sitting in the safe at home when the goblins find you, or if you've only put one magazine through it in the 10 years you've owned it, you're in a big hole long before the ball drops.

Putting these two stories together helps better define the concept of self-defense, especially when it entails a firearm. Breda points out that the human animal is the best defense against predators - that having the proper mindset (i.e. non-prey) is just as important as whether one is armed with a firearm or not. LawDog warns us to be prepared for when the smelly stuff hits the fan, that the greatest tactical advantage one can have is to be armed with a firearm with which one is proficient.

I'll expand on Breda's post a little here. I've had a certain amount of experience with the type of blowhard she encountered through the years. For a long time, I was the "biggest guy in the room" - six feet tall, 220-250 pounds, large build, muscular. While my size meant that I was less attractive to goblins, it also meant that in social situations (such as at the local sports bar) I was a target for a drunk with an axe to grind or a point to prove. I honestly can't count the number of times I was approached by some loudmouth trying to goad me into a fight.

I can, however, count the number of fights I was actually in: zero.

I have nothing to prove. I'm not the toughest guy out there, but I can generally hold my own; I'm not about to roll the dice with my freedom because some jackass wants to show his friends he can take out "the big guy". I basically had two levels of dealing with these imbeciles: the first level was being self-effacing and conciliatory, basically sending the message that I was not the least bit interested in playing the game, nor was I going to be goaded into a fight. Should the person move beyond that level, it went to stage two - draw myself up to my full height, puff out my chest, flex the muscles a bit, and give "the stare" - as I mentioned in comments to Breda's post, "the stare" was meant to convey one of two messages:

"Keep this shit up and I'll be hosing your DNA out of a woodchipper tomorrow"

or

"Keep yapping. I'm just trying to decide which part of you I'm gonna eat first"

Basically, it's the look that says "you have pushed me right to my limit. If you continue to push, you are about to find out the horrors that I am capable of unleashing". 99 times out of 100, this look is sufficient to settle any argument - the blowhards don't actually want to get into a fight; they merely want to project power in a sitaution where they really don't have it. Breda's response to the jerk in the bar was absolutely perfect and appropriate; while she didn't threaten him or even cuss him out, she let him know in no uncertain terms that his continued existence on this planet was due only to her good graces.

LawDog's exhortations come for that 1 time out of 100 when "the stare" is not enough. It could be a psychopath. It could be a goblin intent to do you harm. Thing is, it doesn't matter - you run into that person who will not back down nor be cowed by projection of force alone. And when that happens, you need to be trained to handle the situation and have the tools needed to get the job done. On last week's Gun Nuts, LawDog called in and gave some excellent pointers about knowing one's limits - basically, knowing at what point you're willing to employ deadly force BEFORE you need to... Even in that 1/100 situation, there may - or may not - come a point at which you will need to make the decision to employ force of some sort.

Making that decision ahead of time is the key, as is knowing how to deal with the aftermath.

Avoiding that decision is always the best way; that means being hyper-vigilant of one's surroundings and avoiding bad situations; it means dealing with blowhards in such a manner as to avoid having to use force; and it means being prepared, mentally and physically, to deal with that rare situation where force need be applied. I'm firmly in the "avoid" camp - I'll stay away from sketchy areas; I don't have any illusions of being a "tough guy" with "something to prove"; I'd much rather walk - or run - away from a confrontation than have to get into it.

But if someone's going to do harm to me or mine, I'm damn well ready to introduce a whole new level of suck into their (short) life... I've got my triggers, the points at which I go from mild-mannered dad to the Punisher; I will do everything in my power and then some to avoid that trigger. But once it's on, it's on. I've got the tools, I can use them effectively, and I have no qualms about doing what needs to be done when the shit hits the fan.

As do Breda and the 'Dog...

That is all.

UPDATE: Shorter Tam:

The most important word in "gunfight" is not "gun", it's "fight".

Heh.