Tim Larkin Wants You to Know How to Kill

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating his "system", or any system, ancient or modern, I'm advocating a mindset.

Yes, predators can spot another predator, and usually pick a different target. But, with the crap they have scrambling their brains these days, some will simply attack anyone and think they are going to walk away from it.

 

One time I was jumped by an apple tree... hey, it was me or it... and I just happened to have my Samsher with me...

 

I'm pretty sick of bogus SEALS and Special Forces types. I have known some real bad asses and genuine warriors, and they never crow about themselves.

 

amen!!!

 

2.5 years in the army and living in country where people get killed for a cellphone, I can only say this:

Don't seek trouble, but allways look out for it coming your way.
If you can avoid it, do so.
If you can't, attack with the CLEAR THOUGHT OF ENDING IT FAST.
Your attacker certainly does not count on you atacking him wholehearthedly.
If you start, FINISH IT! Even if the guy gets to be disabled for the rest of his live or worse.

else

run like hell and hope you won't die (there's some chance you can make it BUT it solely depends on your attacker)

I don't like someone else deciding if i'm gonna make it. I'd rather give it my best shot.

Good luck.

 

So, what about this situation:

While in line to pay for your coffee at Super America and within the span of at least four security cameras, the dude in front of you pulls out what appears to be a functional firearm and threatens the clerk with death or great bodily harm. Do you:

a - Pull out your concealed and entirely functional firearm and order him to surrender, or

b - Pull out out your concealed firearm and shoot him in the head without any advisory that you are going to do this?

c - Do nothing but take note of the dude's description and which way he went so you can tell the police?


Dead, in jail or feeling guilty - what's your call?

 

Given that scenario, for me it would be option A, and he'd better listen carefully...it will be his only chance. If he does anything other than comply with care, i would put him down without a second thought.

 

Oh, I suppose it's only right to mention. We're talking about getting attacked/mugged here. Not just some drunk goofball that wants to fight. That kinda guy you just get away from. Or somebody just cursing you out. Sticks and stones, dontcha know...There are levels to a response

 

ASP key chain defender. Nothing like a little shot of pepper to dissuade the drunks. A great "No harm, No foul" option to cover a retreat.

 

Let's see...
First, He's atacking the clerk not you (in fact you are behind his back, so you can dissapear easily)

Second, If he's thretening the clerk it would be for:
1 - money ( to which the clerk should / would be happy to oblige. There's no point getting killed for any amount of money (as they mean nothing).
If there's 80% chance to secure his gun, I would ( some advantage of being from behind here) BUT if not, I'm backing off. If the clerk want's to play brave or stupid over money there's little more you can do without getting possibly hurt.

2 - jeolasy ( he's involved with a relative of some sort or this is an "family" affair. I think this is best left to the participating parties, but again if chances are favourable, I would take him down. Problem is, at that point, everyone around is "oh my gosh" and not thinking clearly...so you could end up hurting someone else too in the process.

so...a - wrong, b - wrong, c - half right (but not wrong) One thing to remember is that most times those people are so "high" they don't actually feel any pain! So there is only a manute chance they will be listening to any threats or arguments. Don't point a gun to someone who has a gun drawn out. You are asking to be shot. Only do it if you actually simultaneously pulling the trigger. NO ARGUING! this ofcourse is / should be you very last resort! As a friend of mine says: I'd rather take my chances in court, than have no chance at all!!!

 

It would be legal here for me to just shoot him with no warning. With the way our "extended castle doctrine" works, the DA couldn't press criminal charges, and the dirtbag's next of kin couldn't bring a civil suit against me.

However, since I am directly behind him, and have the drop on him, I'd draw while putting some distance between us (and making sure the clerk wasn't directly behind where I'd be drilling him), and then warn him to put the gun down, etc.

Like Karda said, if he did ANYTHING but comply with exactly what I said, I'd shoot him to the ground.

Reason I wouldn't run or just let it go, is because dirtbags are killing the clerk more and more, even when the clerk complies. So I'd figure the clerk is dead as soon as the dirtbag puts his gun on him, and I'd try to rectify that situation.

 

can't help but have the feeling this thread might be more appropriately sited in another forum.

but that's just me.

 

I hear ya, kis.
That's what i thought when it was first posted, but i figured we'd let it run its course and die here as long as the conversation is civil. We don't like to pass our trouble on to other forums.

 

"Generally if there's choice in the matter, most likely it's the wrong time to respond." - Tim Larkin

This thread might blend in better on the "practical tactical" forum, but as khuk users there are a few points we might find instructive given periodic references to khuks as defensive impliments.

1 - As articles in the first post suggest, deadly force is not a large amount of force in many cases.

2 - Force applied with a khuk will probably exceed requirements.

3 - In the U.S., justification for deadly force varies from one state to the next. In the Superamerica example, what is O.K. in Florida may not be O.K. in MN or WI.

So, this may be something for us to consider if our minds begin to wander as we reflect on our khuks - or chainsaws.

 

I'm going to propose "option d": kick him in the Naughty Bits from behind, thanking the gods that the most comfortable boots you could find at Sears were a pair of steel-toed Timberland Pros. At the very least, hit him over the head with something.

 

In this scenario

“While in line to pay for your coffee at Super America and within the span of at least four security cameras, the dude in front of you pulls out what appears to be a functional firearm and threatens the clerk with death or great bodily harm. Do you:

a - Pull out your concealed and entirely functional firearm and order him to surrender, or

b - Pull out out your concealed firearm and shoot him in the head without any advisory that you are going to do this?

c - Do nothing but take note of the dude's description and which way he went so you can tell the police?”

1- Make absolutely certain Dirt-bag is acting alone, offering him surrender or cleaning the gene pool means squat to your family if his accomplice takes exception to you. Exception, if the lead starts flying your screwed already…go for it.
2- Non-lethal force is probably a bad idea; it implies that you didn’t think lethal force was necessary and if he’s like me a kick to the nutz is just like foreplay and somebody is gonna get (*&^’ed!
3- C is probably the best option until you decide that the clerk is leaving on a stretcher or in body bag then for me the situation changes dramatically.
If you are going to carry a gun and you are not law enforcement you should spend more time thinking about where you draw the line at using lethal force than you do about what gun you are carrying.
By myself and the “action” is not centered on me that’s my cue to exit stage left at warp 9. With family and the “action” is not centered on us I am holding while trying to get the family away, if we are impeded someone’s getting shot. Alone or with family and I/we are the center of attention then all hell is going to break loose and it is not stopping till my family or I am secure.
Think about it before hand so you don’t have to waste time thinking about it when its happening.
This is why I stay out of Prac/Tac if common sense ever broke out that forum would either actually be informative or dead itself.

 

Part of your defensive toolbox should be a variety of realistic ways to handle most near, intermediate, and far danger situations. Your feelings during a life or death encounter should help dictate the appropriate response at that time. It is foolish to say, "I would do this!" dogmatically, because you may have had too much coffee, or too little sleep, to make a controlled shot on an aggressor; you may be feeling powerful; there are any number of variables, most of them barely discernible, that will help dictate the most effective response FOR YOU at that time.

Train well, and remember that the hard decisions should be made before you're in what we think of as life and death situations. But of course every instant is life or death.

John

 

John, you are entirely right. I did not phrase some of that as well as I could have. I am not advocating a static if A happens then I will automatically do B. My personal take is that; I will not use "lethal" force unless one of the following "things" has occurred or I am convinced that they are imminent. Once one of those "lines are crossed" I still have the option not to use lethal force but if I decide to the moral& ethical safety's against it in my mind have been released.
In a less than lethal confrontation I am more likely to find an environmental solution(i.e., brick walls, bar stools, body check them into traffic) as part of an overall response. I loath the thought of going hand-to-hand so if I have to I'm going to finish it as quick as possible if I can't de-escalate or avoid it..
Ray