PDA

View Full Version : What if a gang attacked me?


njtrigger
November 24, 2007, 07:37 PM
I keep seeing a trend among degenerates to attack people 5-6 to 1, pummel/kick them to the ground and rob them as an afterthought. It seems like the victims of these coward attacks never have a chance.

These clowns surround their victim 360 Degrees and swarm them.

My question is this: Are there any current training techniques/disciplines geared specifically for this type of threat in handgun, knife or impact weapon, or martial arts?

I understand situational awareness and addressing multiple targets on the range, but being circled is something different if the situation gets out of hand or you are unarmed.

All ideas and observations welcome

Hammer1
November 24, 2007, 07:50 PM
Sounds like a good reason to be armed.

sw_florida
November 24, 2007, 07:52 PM
Do not put your self in those situations.

Andyman57
November 24, 2007, 09:27 PM
Always try and be armed; however, if you can't be; the next best thing is to try and avoid situations like that at all costs, also, if you find yourself in that kind of situation and unarmed, go for the groin, the eyes, a simultaneous hard clap on both ears with the palms of your hands; disable the perpetrator as best you can, then run.

Also, if you can take some kick boxing or martial arts training; it would really benefit you!

Rocked
November 24, 2007, 09:38 PM
Yeah, best bet is to stay away from those situations. Or travel in groups.

skywalkrNCSU
November 24, 2007, 10:44 PM
if you are not armed then try things like throat punches, eye gouges, groin shots, etc. basically no holds barred here and you will be fighting for your life so try to inflict as much pain as quickly as you can and avoid the ground at all costs.

Malexander
November 24, 2007, 11:03 PM
I was once assaulted by 5-8 guys my age (17) at a party. I was blind drunk and probably said something stupid. In any case, they followed me outside and surrounded me. I don't remember much, but according to a mate of mine I'd seized one of them in a bear hug wrapping my arms so tight around his neck that he could barely breathe and them locked my legs up on his legs so he couldn't get off me. I'd them fallen backwards.

Though not the best move it turned out that they were fairly surprised I did anything at all. I was able to use the guy on the ground as a shield so they couldn't kick me as easily. Fortunately, none of them had a knife - the commonest weapon in the UK.

On reflection, the best thing is to not get into that situation in the first place. I'm older and far wiser now and have never put myself in that situation again.

Interestingly a mate of mine, a black belt in tae kwon doe, was assaulted on his way out of a party last year by a group of 4 guys. He put one guys nose through the back of his skull and then kicked his way to his car.

I'd been taking jujitsu training for about a year when I was attacked and I've no doubt that it helped. However, martial arts are no substitution for being quick witted and, preferably, heavily armed.

Wildalaska
November 24, 2007, 11:13 PM
Do not put your self in those situations.

Good point.

The chances of random gang attack on any normal civilian on any given day is smaller than a lightning strike.

Murder and assault are not usually stranger crimes

WildwearalightningrodAlaska TM

The Tourist
November 24, 2007, 11:49 PM
degenerates...attack people

First off, we don't like being called degenerates. We prefer to be called "Scruple-challenged Americans."

Another thing, we also have the same right to peaceful assembly. We don't need you "holier than thou" trouble makers hanging around breathing stale beer on us bragging, "You think you're so tough..."

The better question is, why did you provoke us? Did the chrome from my bike make your uppity Rolex watch look like what it actually is, that being, quartz jeweled testicles.

Did you mutter to your buddy about how a "real man" would put us in line? Did you leer at one of our wives? Did you try and corner one of us alone in the bathroom?

You see, I look at your whining from a different perspective. In my life, most of the trouble is actually caused by smart-azz townies, too much beer and wild bragging.

If you want to scratch with the big chickens, then take the results of your foolishlessness like a man. If not, go swagger at a Dairy Queen where the teenagers will be impressed.

Tanzer
November 25, 2007, 08:36 AM
(Still cross-eyed from Tourist's reply), I can say that you've noted a bad situation. USUALLY avoidable, but no guarantee. As for me, I'm thinking 1/2 cornered cat, and 1/2 amature linebacker. No matter the pain, whatever, I'd charge the circle with everything I could muster. Getting outside would be my top priority. If I could achieve this, I'm now looking a tightly grouped pack of jack*sses, and the tables have turned. Can't guarantee it, but it would be my fist, second, and third action.

Double Naught Spy
November 25, 2007, 09:04 AM
I keep seeing a trend among degenerates to attack people 5-6 to 1, pummel/kick them to the ground and rob them as an afterthought. It seems like the victims of these coward attacks never have a chance.

It is interesting that you called these "coward attacks." In watching John Walsh over the years (AMW) and reading posts on forums like this one, I have come to realize that the coward label is used to paint the bad guys in a negative light because we all know that being a coward is a bad thing and maybe even subhuman. Only lesser persons are cowards.

One should not confuse cowardice with strategic superiority. By attacking en masse, they help assure that the intended prey is overwhelmed. If the prey fights back, by having superior numbers, risk to any one member is reduced. So their chance of success is higher while at the same time their risk is lowered. It is not cowardice, but being smart.

Similarly, we called IEDs used against US forces in Iraq "cowardly acts" because the explosion is a form of ambush tactic for which US troops can't fight back because there is no visible enemy. Yet, we consider the lauching of cruise missiles from hundreds or thousands of miles distance or bombs dropped from planes that cannot be detected to not be acts of cowardice, but strategic...even though the people we are bombing have no visible enemy to fight back against when those happen. It is not cowardice, but being smart.

When bad guys are on the lamb and Walsh profiles them on AMW, he calls them cowards. When Scott O'Grady was shot down and evaded capture until he could be rescued, we called him a hero.

Rocked suggested...
Yeah, best bet is to stay away from those situations. Or travel in groups.

If you engage in such tactics, do you consider these tactics to be those of cowardice or of being smart?

The point here is that by classifying your aggressors as cowards does nothing to help you understand the significance of the behavior/tactic being used and it potentially misdirects attention from salient insights.

With all that said, being attacked by 6 guys or more is a classic example of when 5 shots is not enough (for all those "Is a 5 shot revolver enough?" threads).

Dilligaf
November 25, 2007, 10:00 AM
Spouted so much bilge water, we are having to abandon ship....

A gang attack against a lone pedestrian is not a tactical maneuver. It is not a coldly and logically planned act, done to insure numerical superiority, executed in a military manner to limit friendly casualties and to achieve an objective.

It is more akin to an attack by a pack of jackals. It is an attack en masse done by a weaker or less able (individually) animal against the oldest, weakest or sickest member of the herd. It is an attack done with the idea that they have chosen a victim that will not fight back, or fight so ineffectively that it might as well be no defense at all.

Comparing them to jackals is a bit of a disservice to jackals, though, because you don't see jackals attacking just for the joy of causing pain. You don't see jackals attacking just to make themselves feel better about themselves.

Instead, these sub-human trash only attack when they have a helpless victim; when there is no threat to themselves; when they can overwhelm a helpless opponent, inflict pain and injury and then brag about their prowess afterwards.

In short, they are petty, cowardly little thugs who need the emotional and physical backing of their thugish friends to overcome an unarmed and unwary civilian without the means to defend themselves.

As for your comment about traveling in groups for protection might be considered cowardly, that is just as much bull**** as your previous attempted defense. Herd behavior shows that traveling in groups, keeping the herd together, discourages the attack of lone predators and limits the potential damage to the weakest members.

The point here (to use your phrasing) is that lending credence to thuggish behavior by comparing it (poorly, I might add) to military tactics gives no legitimacy to the thugs or their tactics. It just makes you look like a bleeding heart idiot.

Rocked
November 25, 2007, 11:34 AM
Well said Double Naught.

I was thinking along the lines of the first USMC Rule of Combat.

"Bring a weapon. Preferably, bring at least two. Bring all of your friends who have weapons. Bring their friends who have weapons. "

The Tourist
November 25, 2007, 12:42 PM
(Still cross-eyed from Tourist's reply)

C'mon, Tanzer, you should know me well enough by now to know that I'll stir the pot once in a while. We have townies all over Madison who spout the same thing--and I can't ever remember throwing an offensive (the opposite of 'defensive') punch during that five year period.

Yes, there are cases of singular people being attacked by multiple robbers.

And there are just as many singular loud-mouths that should know when to stop drinking.

When I hear these claims, I like to get the back story. When his tale of woe begins with, "All I was doing was sitting on this biker's Harley when everything went black and I woke up in a dumpster. I was a victim..."

Or some mall ninja decides to take a stroll through a ghetto at zero-dark-thirty and is baffled to find crime.

Common sense, boys.

Capt Charlie
November 25, 2007, 01:06 PM
For the life of me, I can't see where njtrigger singled out bikers, Tourist. In fact, I rarely hear of bikers being referred to as a gang. I think he's referring more to true gangs like MS-13, Crips, Bloods, etc.

While the warning signs should be evident before someone finds himself in that situation, random attacks do happen and seem to be on the increase. Gang initiations? Simply for "fun"? Who knows, but the queston's a valid one.

In any case, this needs to be toned down a bit. History notes that wars have started over misunderstandings ;).

Tanzer
November 25, 2007, 01:08 PM
Tourist,
Actually, and not meaning to sound rude, I thought you were joking and forgot to put the smiley icon in place.
I'll give you this... There are plenty of idiots who ask for it, and are stupid enough not to know what they did. I took this thread however as relating to those few who truly are picked out as victims. I think that's where the OP was going.

willson73
November 25, 2007, 01:15 PM
My CCW instructor presented this type of scenario. He said that he would, "Shoot the one with the biggest mouth first."

While there is no guarantee that the cowards are not armed, they likely wouldn't need so many people if they were, and they run the risk of shooting each other if they're circling you. The idea behind his statement is kind of like the old adage, "If you cut the head off a snake..."

The Tourist
November 25, 2007, 01:19 PM
I thought you were joking and forgot to put the smiley icon in place.

Yes, you are correct. I am among friends here, and I should have included a smilie.

But this issue has two sides. I am a tad thin-skinned about the ploy that "everyone is a victim."

I have seen labels on irons that say, "Do not iron creases while wearing the garment."

As you know, some idiot somewhere took a scalding hot clothing iron to his body and then decided to sue the company for big bucks.

And as I have told you, there seems to be something both magnetic and kharmic about me and delicious cheeseburgers. I no sooner smell that wonderful aroma of meat, cheese and lightly sauted onions when a drunken townie mystically appears at my elbow to debate 'toughness' through all eleven of his remaining teeth.

Yes, there is gang related crime. I just want the members of TFL to know that there are also mouthy idiots who just cannot sit quietly and enjoy a beverage while I eat.

Creature
November 25, 2007, 02:01 PM
random attacks do happen and seem to be on the increase.

Odd fact is that around the Hampton Road area of Virginia, many random attacks are also being video taped...by the attackers.

So far, no mention by the media as to whether these attacks are initiations or just malicious pranks, but I suspect they are definitely gang related.

Regardless, there is an ongoing case here in this area where a mob actually killed a victim, probably accidentally, but dead just the same.

And these random attacks are occurring much more frequently than lightning strikes...

Anyway, my preferred method to avoid these ruffians is to to keep myself armed, my head on a swivel and myself out of "hinky" areas.

Oh...and I always look for the leader of any group that I might encounter. He/she goes with me if it comes down to it.

Double Naught Spy
November 25, 2007, 03:44 PM
"Bring a weapon. Preferably, bring at least two. Bring all of your friends who have weapons. Bring their friends who have weapons. "

And so you are suggested the USMC is a bunch of cowards? Of course not. You are suggesting they plan on taking their opposition successfully by overwhelming the opposition in numbers and power.

Rocked
November 25, 2007, 04:33 PM
Exactly. If there was a chance of me being in a fight, mugged, or whatever, I would want as many of my friends with me as I could get. I dont see it as being a coward (I know I cant fight well) I see it as being smart and prepared.

sgtdemeo
November 25, 2007, 04:48 PM
First off, Gangs overwhelmingly single out Members of rival gangs for this kind of attack. while i am sure that there are no doubt random attacks of this kind, they are much more rare than getting attacked by a single person. But to my main point.... in a situation like this, if you are in the center of a circle of people who had the ability of being corralled, the last thing i would want to do is flash a weapon, due to the fact that you will undoubtably end up on the receiving end of it. if you waited till that point to take your first action, then its too late. your first defense should be the situational awareness to have steered clear of that in the first place. these attacks do not happen to "random" people. they happen to people who advertise themselves as easy targets. Just my 2 cents.

Stevie-Ray
November 25, 2007, 08:51 PM
Instead, these sub-human trash only attack when they have a helpless victim; when there is no threat to themselves; when they can overwhelm a helpless opponent, inflict pain and injury and then brag about their prowess afterwards.

In short, they are petty, cowardly little thugs who need the emotional and physical backing of their thugish friends to overcome an unarmed and unwary civilian without the means to defend themselves.Well said, Dilligaf. I agree with the entire post. They are also cowards because instead of working hard and studying themselves up to a comfortable living, they choose the quick way of relieving other people of their hard-earned money. Simple cowardly trash.

The Tourist
November 25, 2007, 10:44 PM
The mistake here is the assumption that if there is one man by himself, he must be the victim. If he engages a group, then the group must be the aggressors.

Not true.

I have often cited the newspaper story about three jackers who tried to steal a man's car. The owner of the car pulled out his firearm and killed one of his attackers.

For the rest of this article, the newspaper referred to the dead jacker as "the victim."

He is not the victim. He's the attacker, and as an attacker, he lost.

The victim does not cease being the victim just because he won.

Now, let me put a face on this. I don't care how many members of a bike club are sitting quietly having a cool drink if the townie starts the ruckus.

I don't care if the odds are 50 to 1. If the townie threatens a member of this majority, the townie does not become the victim just because he gets stomped for being stupid.

Now, consider this. To the far political left, all of us who love firearms are inbred rednecks. Our character is impugned simply because the opposing side seeks to define us by an unjustified standard.

Same deal here. Get the back story. Do not assume that the lone guy is always the victim.

Frankly, if I was to pick the troublemaker out of a group before the fight started, I would always look for the little Barney Fife guy with a chip on his shoulder. Those little guys are the start of more fights than any group of lounging bikers.

sw_florida
November 25, 2007, 11:04 PM
People who engage in multiple aggressor attacks are cowards when on their own. Their degenerated wish, as a group, to attack randomly selected people isn't smart, it's animalistic and as such is met with contempt by the majority, including the newspress writers. One on one they can't make it. Sure, they may have the muscle, but the brains is lacking, and if the vicitim is armed they need to be 6 to even the odds. ****ing apes.

The Tourist
November 25, 2007, 11:13 PM
People who engage in multiple aggressor attacks

To that I will agree.

The problem is that lots of people do not know the back story and assume the little guy is always the victim.

Tanzer
November 26, 2007, 09:18 AM
Tourist,
Your point is well taken. Frankly, Two very good freinds I grew up with belong to a local biker's club; (name not noted; privacy). They raised more money for my family when my son died (we were young and just starting out - money was tight) than all other donations combined. I personally don't even understand why you relate bikers to this group. These guys are more than capable of doing things themselves. Kick over my freind Teddy's bike, and it's not a group you're going to deal with, it's Teddy.
That being said, the picture I'm drawing is of a gang of punks with black fingernail polish and pierced eyebrows (maybe just my area of the country). A "Townie" as you refer to, is usually dealt with by being stuffed in a trash can, They're not woth the trouble. Listen to me.. I'm all grown up and talking like this...
I now have a CWP. Those days are over and done with. This thread relates to the admittedly slight chance that you find yourself chosen as a victim. Made even more slight by the fact that as a responsible gun carrier, you are wary enough to avoid the situation in the first place. The situation is 98% bogus to begin with, but worthy of debate in its intended manner.
As stated before, you are among friends. You like to stir the pot, but please don't add vinegar to it. Your side is viable, but it's not just a biker deal, and Townies are not worth our trouble. They're townies because they never got the self-woth to be anything else, so why bother with them?
Keep that bike polished, I lost the nerve for two wheels twenty years ago.

The Tourist
November 26, 2007, 12:04 PM
I personally don't even understand why you relate bikers to this group.

That's very simple to answer. It's the group I know.

I have never been a member of Congress, the mafia, Al Quaida, a sewing bee, NasCar, The Flying Elvi, or The Crest Kids.

But I am a club biker, and I've seen idiots.

As I mentioned in another thread, co-workers at the sporting goods store often debate ideas, like we do here. And frankly, if I had to use force against a mugger in this liberal city, my past would be a problem.

You can imagine the scenario. A mugger approaches me, I get ticked off, and I use strength and a very sharp knife to defend myself. I am now faced with a problem that Massad Ayoob has pointed out many times.

I must now "survive" in court. Weight lifter. Knife sharpener. Biker.

I've seen this same issue many times. You'll see six peaceful bikers at Joey's Anchor Inn or "The Wisco," enjoying a cold drink or a pool game. A drunken townie decides to discuss his displeasure.

The issue now becomes "six on one" and all of the problems of perception that concept brings.

Like I said, you have to consider the back story. You cannot just look at the basic situation, and reach a snap decision about a gang attack.

lanlan2255@msn.com
November 26, 2007, 12:31 PM
Avoid that situation...but, expect the unexpected.
Slug with everything you have, the throat, the temple on the side of the head. Kick with all your might the knees, between the legs, stomach...
Normally if you put one or two down, the rest will run..hopefully
If it is your life, do not hold anything back. :rolleyes:

It is all a painful hassle, especially if you could have avoided the whole thing somehow. :confused:

Tanzer
November 26, 2007, 12:44 PM
[QUOTE]I have never been a member of Congress, the mafia, Al Quaida, a sewing beWhat?e, NasCar, The Flying Elvi, or The Crest Kids.[/QUOTE
What? You've never been a flying Elvi?? Now I've lost all respect. :D

Mark Milton
November 26, 2007, 12:53 PM
The late David Arnold was rather fond of Colt .357 wheelguns.
He was also a policeman in Africa in the 60s and 70s.
He always said blow the head off the first agressor and the rest tend to scatter...

The Tourist
November 26, 2007, 12:57 PM
What? You've never been a flying Elvi?? Now I've lost all respect.

Yes, it's true.

This big old bad biker is afraid of heights.

I get a little woozy on a tall step ladder. Since we have vaulted ceilings in several rooms of my home, I had to buy one of those long collapsing bulb changers to replace lights.

sw_florida
November 26, 2007, 05:33 PM
The Tourist didn't understand my post above, but I'm sure the rest of you did.

Michael Anthony
November 26, 2007, 06:55 PM
Wasn't this a thread a month ago?

The solution (http://youtube.com/watch?v=tF---otSosQ) is still the same!

Double Naught Spy
November 26, 2007, 07:55 PM
Oh that's right, McTony, we are all Hollywood Ninjas. :rolleyes:

Jay1958
November 26, 2007, 08:25 PM
It's real easy to say "avoid those situations".

Let me give you a situation that actually happened to me, just earlier today. Tell me what you would have done.

I had a package to ship via UPS. I was returning one of my pistols to the manufacturer for warranty work. I checked the UPS website and decided that to avoid any hassles, I would go directly to a UPS shipping center. I've heard many stories of people who tried to ship firearms at a "UPS Store" or "Authorized Shipping Center" and ended up having to go directly to a UPS center/hub.

As I approached the door, I noticed a sign on the door that said something like "No Weapons / No Firearms Allowed". I returned to my car and dropped my carry weapon into the range bag in my trunk, and returned to the customer center with my package.

When I entered the customer center, it appeared to be empty - that is, no one was working at the counter, and an open door behind the counter lead to the rear where I assumed someone would be coming out to the counter soon.

A sign instructed me to "enter your information into this terminal and print your label here before taking your package to the counter" or something to that effect, so I decided to go ahead and do that before attempting to contact one of the employees for assistance.

As I was entering the information, and still no employees visible, four young males, very rough looking, suddenly entered from outside. Here I was - trapped with them - they were directly between me and the door - and unarmed due to the company policy of posting their premises.

I wanted to appear calm, and kept entering my information while trying to keep an eye on them with my peripheral vision - not being too obvious, that is. They stayed together as a group, just inside the door, and appeared to be just talking and cutting up among themselves. This made me very nervous - they had no packages to ship, and did not appear to have a purpose to be there. They made no attempt to approach the counter or do anything to get attention from employees who might be in earshot beyond the open door.

After a moment or two, a male UPS employee entered the room from the back, and asked the young men if he could help them. One of them muttered a question, something like "Is Kim working? I need to see Kim for a minute." and were told no one by that name was working. They turned and filed out.

If they had attacked me as a group, my only hope - other than desperation attempts at hand-to-hand combat - would be that the employees would have heard a ruckus and come to my aid. Otherwise, I would have been pretty much screwed...

So what do the "avoid those situations" folks have to say about this? To me, it illustrates that we can't always avoid "those situations". Who would have known that a trip to a UPS shipping center could have possibly been a high-risk venture?

More important: what should I have done, differently? or to protect myself?

sgtdemeo
November 26, 2007, 11:41 PM
Jay1958, please tell me if I missed something in your story that would make anything that these 4 men did seem at all threatning. lets recap... they came into a buisness during normal, operating hours. they stood away from you, idd not approach, or for that matter, do anything physical to imply that there was a threat. they were, as you say, "talking and Cutting up among themselves" . again, still nothing even remotely threatning. i am sorry, but i can't see what about these men was do disarming to you. Explain, please.

DoItRight
November 26, 2007, 11:55 PM
Jay1958, please tell me if I missed something in your story that would make anything that these 4 men did seem at all threatning. lets recap... they came into a buisness during normal, operating hours. they stood away from you, idd not approach, or for that matter, do anything physical to imply that there was a threat. they were, as you say, "talking and Cutting up among themselves" . again, still nothing even remotely threatning. i am sorry, but i can't see what about these men was do disarming to you. Explain, please.Same here.

:confused:

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 12:04 AM
Jay1958, interesting story. From this we learnt to screw those 'no guns' signs, as long as it's not the real post office or a sheriff's office. The four didn't seem to have any business there and if the vibes you felt were unpleasant, I trust you. It's those situations which evolve into attacks. Next time, keep your gun on you. The detectors don't go off. I'll keep your story in mind. Ah, and your question. The answer would have been to keep the gun on you, and not let them encircle you.

Jay1958
November 27, 2007, 12:10 AM
SgtDemeo and DoItRight,

You're right, they did absolutely NOTHING that was OVERTLY threatening.

Can you seriously tell me that you never perceive threats based on age, gender, clothing, behavior, demeanor, "gut instinct"?

Me personally, I may be a victim of false thinking and stereotyping, but when I am in a situation where I am unarmed and alone, my internal radar goes on much higher alert if I am placed in a situation where retreat/escape is blocked or at best, difficult, if not unlikely, and four young males who are unkempt, wearing clothing and generally behaving in ways that are generally associated with (insert your choice of: bikers, gangs, drug culture, skinheads, punk, gangbanger, etc), who are present inside a business, with no apparent reason to be there (not shipping anything, nor picking anything up, nor even making an attempt to speak to an employee or "fellow customer") than if four female senior citizens, dressed and behaving in ways that lead me to believe they might be part of of some garden club or civic or religious group, had me 'cornered' in the same situation...!

"Profiling" may not be politically correct, or even illegal if done by government agencies, but if individual citizens who may be potential victims don't do a certain amount of 'profiling' as part of their ongoing risk assessment, then IMO they are probably at greater risk for that decision.

Not to say that it isn't POSSIBLE that an 80-year-old grandmother, driving a Mercedes and wearing expensive jewelry and expensive designer clothing might not approach you without warning and kill you at the local QuikMart, but ignoring the clothing, age, gender, behavior, etc. of strangers you encounter may be done at your own risk.

These four young men appeared to me to be nervous, fidgety, restless, speaking in somewhat hushed tones, laughing nervously at times... it really appeared to me that they might be considering robbing me and the cash register at the counter - and even now I'm not really convinced that it wasn't own their mind and for some reason they decided against it. I'm not at all convinced they actually knew anyone who works there - that itself may well have been a ruse to 'explain' their presence. The employee at the counter didn't say "They're not here right now", he said "There's no one by that name working here."

I would have done absolutely nothing today any differently if I had been well armed than I did unarmed. But I still think this may have been a high-risk situation that the potential perpetrators walked away from, for whatever reason. Thank God!

sgtdemeo wrote:
"Jay1958, please tell me if I missed something in your story that would make anything that these 4 men did seem at all threatning. lets recap... they came into a buisness during normal, operating hours. they stood away from you, idd not approach, or for that matter, do anything physical to imply that there was a threat. they were, as you say, "talking and Cutting up among themselves" . again, still nothing even remotely threatning. i am sorry, but i can't see what about these men was do disarming to you. Explain, please."

Sarge
November 27, 2007, 12:18 AM
What if a gang attacked me?

They'd likely shove you in the back of the car, and take you to their hideout or an abandoned warehouse...then they'd tie you to a chair...shine a bright light in your eyes, blow cheap cigar smoke in your face. You know- 'The Works'. They would demand secret information, like the passwords to your internet accounts. Oh, you'd resist valiantly I'm sure- but they have ways to make you talk. So we have to assume that they'd eventually get the informaton.

Then they would go to the sites you visit and READ ALL YOUR POSTS!

After that, it would be like The Ransom of Red Chief- they'd be trying to pay us to take you back.:p

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 12:19 AM
I just came up with another thought after I shut off my computer, so here I am again. When you know that you have business ahead of you that requires of you that you dump your hand gun, cirlce the place first to see if any potential scumbags are hanging around. If there are, return later. All those signs on stores 'no guns': just ignore them from now on. Say you didn't see the sign if ever caught. Always carry mace concealed. Carry it into the post office too, while not you hand gun. If ever caught, say it's not a gun.

sgtdemeo
November 27, 2007, 12:29 AM
sw florida.... so I am to understand that you are advocating that its ok for you to break the law whenever you feel like it dosn't suit your purpose? what then when others do it? or, worse yet, what if you got caught, and all that press was on you? seems like an attitude like that just feeds the stereotypes that we law abiding, responsible firearms owners are trying to get out of the media, huh? obeying the law is what responsible people do. if you don't agree with a law, then get a lobby together and change it. but i cannot and will not advocate breaking the law at your own whim, nor recommending that others do so.

DoItRight
November 27, 2007, 01:00 AM
... "Profiling" may not be politically correct, or even illegal if done by government agencies, but if individual citizens who may be potential victims don't do a certain amount of 'profiling' as part of their ongoing risk assessment, then IMO they are probably at greater risk for that decision ... I have an increased sensitivity to this particular topic because I happen to be a 6'3", dark-skinned, black man and I have been the subject of this type of "wary behavior" for most of my life -- as recently as yesterday.

Some days, I'll turn on my "Magic Johnson Smile" and say something (in my best non-threatening, college-educated, sales executive, hyper-articulate voice) to disarm the person/people who are feeling uncomfortable and the tension goes away. Other days however, I may be tired, my feet may be hurting, I may be lost in thought about some jerk client of mine, or absently dreaming about my next handgun purchase and I simply don't feel like going out of my way to accomodate someone who is viewing me through their own stereotypical lens. On those says, I simply don't feel like it. But the glances and the suspicion wear on you after a while.

Having said all of that, I am the biggest proponent in the world of the notion that "the best way to avoid trouble is to avoid trouble." And the best way to do that is to listen to your "Spidey sense."

That's obviously what you were doing at the UPS Store and I simply can't fault you for it. Just like the young fellas didn't do anything overt, neither did you -- you were just "being aware."

Smart move on your part (and like the kids say), "I ain't mad at you about it."

The Tourist
November 27, 2007, 01:11 AM
The Tourist didn't understand my post above, but I'm sure the rest of you did.

Yes, I did, but I don't think you understand the overall implication of the thread and my basic objection.

First, let me underline my basic postulate. I agree, a group attack by aggressors is a savage act with no redeeming value.

Other than that, you're pretty much incorrect.

I have crossed paths with many folks who could easily be the subject of this thread. And let me educate you to one important fact--they are far from being cowards, either alone or in groups.

Most of these guys just like to fight, in fact, I think they live for Friday nights, cheap drink specials and busting heads. I also believe that many of these "ultimate fighter" specials you see on TV were spawned by these folks. Perhaps the early contestants were in fact these very folks. They're tough, they're used to pain, and they enjoy inflicting it.

As to your overall evaluation that many of these folks are "devoid of brains," let me also inform you that you are pretty much incorrect.

I lived in their tough world for over five years. But after my IQ was measured as a child I was separated into accelerated and gifted & talented schools. Even for a bi-polar, my synaptic speed is quick. In dealing with other people in this environment you seem to despise, I've found that the 'mechanics' who design custom bikes are actually artists.

TV's Jesse James obviously is in this higher intellectual sect, turning to mechanics simply because he was bored as a child.

But I have also learned something else about people who stand out and have the nerve to succeed. For some reason, it just seems to tick other people off. There's even a German word for the idea, "Schadenfreude."

If I'm tough, then I must be a coward on steroids. If I'm smart, I must have cheated on exams. And when I fail, as most people do, then there are legions who delight in that fall from grace.

Don't fall for the stereotyping. Don't underestimate the guy who refuses to be beaten or will not back down.

As I have stated, I have seen more drunken, mouthy Barney Fife types start trouble than any lurking hulk with a bad attitude. Tough guys know they are tough, there's no honor in seeking out the weak.

But just because you feel you have a higher breeding, it is no license to enrage them.

And never when I'm eating a perfect cheeseburger.

Wildalaska
November 27, 2007, 03:31 AM
Can you seriously tell me that you never perceive threats based on age, gender, clothing, behavior, demeanor, "gut instinct"?

Reacting based on hinkiness requires articulable facts. I dont see any in your example


WildnotaverygoodexampleAlaska TM

TexasSeaRay
November 27, 2007, 04:27 AM
sw florida.... so I am to understand that you are advocating that its ok for you to break the law whenever you feel like it dosn't suit your purpose? what then when others do it? or, worse yet, what if you got caught, and all that press was on you? seems like an attitude like that just feeds the stereotypes that we law abiding, responsible firearms owners are trying to get out of the media, huh? obeying the law is what responsible people do. if you don't agree with a law, then get a lobby together and change it. but i cannot and will not advocate breaking the law at your own whim, nor recommending that others do so.

? ? ?

I didn't read where he was advocating breaking a law.

A sign in a business window saying "no guns" is not a law--it's a policy of that business. My policy is to ignore such dumbass company policies unless their sign has specifically met the letter of the law (regarding "no firearms) of the state they reside and do business in. In other words, the sign had better have the USC or state stautue code on it that informs me it is specifically prohibited.

The place I work part-time at now until I fully retire has a policy of "no weapons on company property." Stuff that. My carry gun is under the seat of my truck every single time I drive up to work.

And guess what? I'm not breaking the law. I'm sure as hell violating company policy, but I am not--repeat, NOT--breaking the law.

Jeff

sgtdemeo
November 27, 2007, 07:45 AM
ok, perhaps i was mistaken about the law being broken, however, i still feel the same way about my advice. when i enter someone elses property, even if i have been invited, or if i have every right to be there, as in the case of a store, i am responsible to follow the wishes of the person who owns the property. even if it isn't breaking the law, it still isn't the right thing to do, and sure as hell is pretty disrespectful to another totally law abiding citizen. bottom line is, if i owned a store, i would expect that you follow my rules when entering. if not, then simply shop somewhere else. bottom line. i guess what i am complaining about is the attitudeof I am above that rule, or that said rule must only apply to others. wrong. they apply to all, and as i said, if you don't agree with the store policy, then shuffle off and take your business elsewhere, or follow the rules. bottom line.

The Tourist
November 27, 2007, 12:18 PM
i am responsible to follow the wishes of the person who owns the property

This is correct. The owner of the property trumps 'rights.'

Oh, I am all for enumerated rights. However, the fundmental right of the Revolutionary War was to enjoy one's work and property without the monarchy demanding he house British soldiers.

Now, when it comes to firearms, I wouldn't care if TexasSeaRay came to my home with a door-gun off a Heuy gunship. I enjoy firearms, and I want to mingle with people and hunters who are like-minded.

However, you cannot smoke in my home. And my guess is that I cannot overhaul a Sportster engine on TexasSeaRay's coffee table--at least, not without permission.

This element ties into our debate here, and that centers on respect. One of the elements of this, again, is to teach those children in your care that other people have rights, and you cannot act like a little hooligan every time your blood rises.

For example, as a boy, our school bus dropped me off near home, but I had to walk a few blocks. I could shave off a good distance if I cut through the backyard of a woman who's entire yard was gigantic flowers.

This woman called my Mom and asked her to instruct me that her yard was not a turnpike, and I was to stop walking there without permission.

Now, I wasn't going to hurt her flowers, in fact, I doubt if one little boy was going to wear a path in that yard. But that wasn't the issue. Her yard wasn't the road. That much I understood, and I never did it again.

The concept of understanding boundaries also applies to adults. If I was to return to my boyhood home, I still wouldn't use that woman's yard.

Jay1958
November 27, 2007, 01:54 PM
I have an increased sensitivity to this particular topic because I happen to be a 6'3", dark-skinned, black man and I have been the subject of this type of "wary behavior" for most of my life -- as recently as yesterday.

So, DoItRight, if four young male caucasian (skinheads, punks, whatever, I'm no expert on their "culture") that I was a little concerned about had walked in on you in a building where your only exit was to go thru them, and they stood right at the door, blocking it, with no apparent business to conduct and no apparent reason for being there - it wouldn't have crossed your mind that maybe they were considering robbing or assaulting you?

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 01:57 PM
The 'no guns' signs, like at UPS (FedEx doesn't have them), is in the same category as 'no red underwears'. The propery owner will never find out what I wear, so in this case I don't care. The property owner thinks a no-guns-policy will eliminate robbery and assault. Let the property owner continue to live in that dream...

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 02:00 PM
Have you hugged your hand gun today?

Jay1958
November 27, 2007, 02:25 PM
Can you seriously tell me that you never perceive threats based on age, gender, clothing, behavior, demeanor, "gut instinct"?

Reacting based on hinkiness requires articulable facts. I dont see any in your example

WildAlaska,

Reacting? My "reaction" was to be alert and aware and somewhat concerned. I already stated that if I had a weapon at the time, my actions would have been NO DIFFERENT. It wasn't like I was going to draw down on them on the basis that I was concerned that they MIGHT be up to "no good" and that a robbery attempt MIGHT POSSIBLY occur.

If I had posted this story and told how that I saw them come in, then turned my back and ignored them, and then got my wallet stolen and was beaten to a pulp and cut in the process - the same people who are faulting me for "overreacting" would probably be the same ones faulting me for not going on full alert and preparing for the possibility of a imminent robbery/assault attempt...!

Whatever...

Reminds me of a girl I once dated BRIEFLY. When I "A", she wanted "B". When I did "B", what she really wished I had done was "C". No one could do anything without her finding fault and picking them apart...

Here are a few articulable facts:

- males are more than five times more likely to commit a crime than females
- 68% of robberies are committed by males between age 12 to 34
-- source: Dept of Justice website

Here is an articulable opinion, mine:

- these guys looked and acted like thugs who might be looking for trouble

DoItRight
November 27, 2007, 02:27 PM
So, DoItRight, if four young male caucasian (skinheads, punks, whatever, I'm no expert on their "culture") that I was a little concerned about had walked in on you in a building where your only exit was to go thru them, and they stood right at the door, blocking it, with no apparent business to conduct and no apparent reason for being there - it wouldn't have crossed your mind that maybe they were considering robbing or assaulting you?

In a public place, during business hours? No.

If they weren't acting in a threatening manner, "just talking and cutting up among themselves", I would have taken them at face value that they were a group of guys hanging out doing whatever it is they were doing.

FYI, I have been assaulted by a group of "young male caucasians" before -- but not under these circumstances. That time, I was a teenager playing tennis with 2 black friends at a public park. We were chased away by a group of bat-swinging, brick-throwing, insult-hurling "young male caucasians" who felt that Blacks had no business playing tennis on a public tennis court on a Saturday afternoon -- but that's another story. Suffice it to say that Mt. Greenwood park in Chicago back in 1975 was a very different place than it is today. If you're from Chicago, you'll understand. (No point being made here other than "we've all had our share of bad experiences.")


Having said all of that, I am the biggest proponent in the world of the notion that "the best way to avoid trouble is to avoid trouble." And the best way to do that is to listen to your "Spidey sense."

That's obviously what you were doing at the UPS Store and I simply can't fault you for it. Just like the young fellas didn't do anything overt, neither did you -- you were just "being aware."

As I mentioned above, I had no problem with your thinking. You did what you thought you had to do and since there were no overt actions on anyone's part, no harm-no foul.

The point I was making in my rant is that not everyone who looks different than you and acts differently than you expect is out to harm you. You do have to "be aware" of your surroundings but not to the point that every group of "different looking individuals" becomes a group of "thugs looking for trouble."

Jay1958
November 27, 2007, 02:31 PM
In a public place, during business hours? No.

Okay, we are beating a dead horse here, but this "public place" was a UPS shipping center in an industrial park, in a somewhat remote area, and there was no one present in the room except for the five of us - no employees, no other customers.

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 03:14 PM
Jay1958, you are entitled to feel what ever you felt.

Personally, I often feel uneasy about shady characters. My solution is to have nothing to do with them, not stand close to them, etc. It is my life.

TexasSeaRay
November 27, 2007, 03:28 PM
This is correct. The owner of the property trumps 'rights.'

Not always, and not without notable exceptions to the law.

If I have a public business, I cannot put up a sign that says "whites only" or "men only" or "No Jews." I especially cannot openly employ those attitudes/tactics in hiring practices.

Now, I'm not saying I agree with that. I'm a believer in property owner's rights. And I believe a business should be allowed to only serve whites or blacks or Jews or deny them service or employment. I think the market place would show them a huge backlash (as it should be), but they should be free to be a bigoted idiot if they so desire.

However, if a property owner/business owner accepts so much as one nickel of public money (ie, tax dollars) or gets tax breaks, then he/she has another set of rules they must operate by and that changes the equation substantially.

Oh, I am all for enumerated rights. However, the fundmental right of the Revolutionary War was to enjoy one's work and property without the monarchy demanding he house British soldiers.

Which is why in another scenario somewhere else on this forum, I stated that there is no way in hell I would give over a gun to a cop who "needed" it or demanded it because of a "situation."

I see little difference between that and being forced to quarter soldiers.

Now, when it comes to firearms, I wouldn't care if TexasSeaRay came to my home with a door-gun off a Heuy gunship. I enjoy firearms, and I want to mingle with people and hunters who are like-minded.

My point with CC is that if you carry in such a manner that no one is ever the wiser, what someone doesn't know isn't going to bother them. If I were to come to your house, the only way you'd know I was armed is if you were to frisk me or walk me through a magnotometer.

However, you cannot smoke in my home. And my guess is that I cannot overhaul a Sportster engine on TexasSeaRay's coffee table--at least, not without permission.

Can't smoke in my house either. As far as overhauling a hawg motor on the coffee table, you'd have to ask the missus about that.

This element ties into our debate here, and that centers on respect. One of the elements of this, again, is to teach those children in your care that other people have rights, and you cannot act like a little hooligan every time your blood rises.

You're right. This is a function of attitude and maturity rather than firearms or concealed carry. People act like idiots and thugs with or without a weapon.

Jeff

Jay1958
November 27, 2007, 05:47 PM
sw_florida wrote:
Jay1958, you are entitled to feel what ever you felt.

Personally, I often feel uneasy about shady characters. My solution is to have nothing to do with them, not stand close to them, etc. It is my life.

I'm glad you understand where I am coming from.

The whole point that I was trying to make, that seems to have been completely missed, is that you don't always know when and where things may go bad.

A lot of people on this board keep saying "avoid those situations", and the only real point I was trying to make is that I felt like I ended up in a very vulnerable, weak position without any real way of knowing what I was walking into.

Regardless of what those four guys actual intentions were, if they would have pulled guns and/or knives and set about robbing me and the cash register/front counter, what seemed like a very low-risk situation: going to ship a package at a UPS Customer Center at one of their service hubs, might have turned out to be quite literally the death of me.

The question that I was trying to ask is: if in fact that would have happened, how could that situation have been avoided? Pay someone to run your errands? Stay inside your castle and put alligators in the moat?

Situations that you don't want to find yourself in, can't always be avoided.

sw_florida
November 27, 2007, 08:31 PM
I went to the post office today. Beforehand I had put my large .357 magnum in the glove compartment. On the parking lot of the post office I drove by the entrance and looked for shady characters, inside or outside parked cars. I saw none. I parked right outside the entrance. I did my errand. Returned to my car. Popped my heavy baby back in its hip holster and drove off. Had there been warning signals when I arrived I would have driven to another post office. Snug as a bug in a rug.

The Tourist
November 28, 2007, 03:04 AM
looked for shady characters

If I had been there, what would I have looked like? Remember, I was an corporate executive officer for almost 30 years.

And like I always warn folks, I'm really a 14 year old high school girl on the school cheerleading squad who portrays an old biker on discussion forums.

Creature
November 28, 2007, 10:31 AM
Here is a very interesting article with some very pertinent lessons to be learned:

http://www.slate.com/id/2178230

David Armstrong
November 28, 2007, 01:37 PM
A sign in a business window saying "no guns" is not a law--it's a policy of that business.
Let's not be real quick to use a broad brush here. There are a number of states where that IS a law, and violating it can get you a fine, jail time, and loss of CCW license.
My point with CC is that if you carry in such a manner that no one is ever the wiser, what someone doesn't know isn't going to bother them.
I think that sort of misses the point. Just because it is not known/discovered doesn't make it right. I don't know if my neighbor is stealing cable TV. But if he is, it is wrong and should not be condoned.

The Tourist
November 28, 2007, 01:50 PM
Let's not be real quick to use a broad brush here.

Mr. Armstrong, thank you for underlining that fact.

Many times during these debates I think that the generalities we use become "facts" as the discussion continues.

For example, as this thread stretched on it was clear to me that our use of the word "gang" translated to "any time I am outnumbered."

Obviously you cannot hide behind that if you are the aggressor and you are the one that initiated the attack.

Also, you have pointed out another flaw in the overall reasoning in private CCW. What is legal in East T-Shirt Iowa is not protected by the same statutes as in Eskimo Pants, Alaska.

Now, most of us enjoy target shooting and hunting and we're quite savvy abut the patchwork quilt of laws and their idiocy. But like them or not, if you break a law, you do the time.

My concern has always been that one guy in a thousand that thinks because he read something in a computer forum it is fact and protection under law.

This is the nut-job who stumbles into a Denny's Restaurant at zero-dark-thirty. He finds me and a few friends peacefully out on the highway trying to get home, and comes up blazing because an individual is always 'right' when facing a 'gang.'

He knows this. He read it in a forum.

David Armstrong
November 28, 2007, 01:58 PM
He knows this. He read it in a forum.
LOL! I agree, sometimes I think most of the forums on the 'net should have a mandatory "WARNING: this is the internet, not real life. Use this information at your own risk!"

sw_florida
November 28, 2007, 02:11 PM
The Tourist, what kind of attitude is that you are cultivating on your own behalf? Don't you think I and most others here can differ between black scumbag and a decent black person? It's not the color of a person's skin that defines a person; it's his attitude.

Wake up, will you? Or do you take pride in dragging down the black community?

The Tourist
November 28, 2007, 02:14 PM
LOL! I agree

It's very serious to me. (And that comment is not directed to you, I find the situation humorous, myself.)

I was once banned from a forum because they believed I only posed as a real biker.

Their 'evidence'?

Well, I admitted to being white collar, I have a college degree, and my use of language "was not something they had ever seen." Hence, I must be a poser.

The day it happened I was so angry I actually imagined driving my front wheel over the groin of the instigator, crushing his gonads, and laughing, "Well, this isn't really happening, you said this bike doesn't truly exist!"

But, for the purposes of this debate (and frankly other ones) I feel you should always be careful in stating facts, privileges as opposed to rights, quotes from media sources, and the implications of historical situations.

Or, come see me and watch me sharpen. You can polish the chrome on my bike while you wait. (I'm still ticked off.)

CrazyIvan007
December 3, 2007, 12:50 PM
What if a gang attacked me?

Aim for the person who is most likely the leader. Hopefully his demise will cause disertion of his followers.

If they continue, try for whoever you can.

Alleykat
December 6, 2007, 05:47 PM
For the life of me, I can't see where njtrigger singled out bikers, Tourist. In fact, I rarely hear of bikers being referred to as a gang. I think he's referring more to true gangs like MS-13, Crips, Bloods, etc.

I agree 100%. The response regarding "smartass townies" and bikers was just typical "wrong-side-of-the-tracks-upbringing", lower middle-class silliness.

porkskin
December 6, 2007, 08:02 PM
I still think that if one person insults your group, then ONE person from your group steps up. I just don't see a situation where "Barney Fife" would require more than one person to set him straight.

benny27
December 6, 2007, 09:18 PM
Stay armed and loaded to the hilt, and when you sense one of these altercations about to happen turn around and say which one of you m-fer's wants to die first.. they're nothing but punks I say kill'em all or die trying, just my advice.:D

1911zep
December 6, 2007, 09:24 PM
krav magna. maga? not sure the spelling.. but it's mostly yiddish for wail on some ass, I think. standard issue for the mossad, isreali defense (offense?) forces. incorporates weapons (knives, pistols, m16s with bayonets, whatever). looks fairly effective, although I've never had any formal training in it or any other fighting art.

all that being said, I think you're better off to do all you can to be sure you don't get into such scenarios in the first place.

The Tourist
December 7, 2007, 12:06 AM
The response regarding "smartass townies" and bikers was just typical "wrong-side-of-the-tracks-upbringing"

Why should my meal be interrupted because some brain-donor can't keep his hands to himself? Why does graduating from college make me a target? Why does my ownership of a Harley imply anything?

The fact is that idiots come in all flavors. A biker quietly eating dinner is not a target for your amusement. So don't be surprised is your smart alec comments land you on the floor with a boot in your azz.

BTW, it's my experience that today's bikers make a whole lot more money and come from a better neighborhood than their detractors. Every price a Harley?

As for my upbringing, I always know which fork to use.

Wildalaska
December 7, 2007, 02:12 AM
As for my upbringing, I always know which fork to use.

Ummm...the one with the spike thingies?:confused:

:D

WildemilypostAlaska TM

The Tourist
December 7, 2007, 12:14 PM
which fork to use...Ummm...the one with the spike thingies?

No, but it's the one just to the left...

I'm going to harp on this thing until the Walter Mitty's get it right.

It's the Barney Fifes that usually start fights.

Why would a scarred, rock-hard muscled 250 pound throttle jockey grab a bespeckled weinie in a public place--and then need six other guys to help put him down?

Sorry, pal, it don't happen.

Now, do drunken townies wander over to guys to impress their girl friends, or more properly their drinking buddies. Yes, all of the time.

Now, listen up. This is important.

After the idiot is thrown out, squealing into the night, a Monday morning appears on the horizon, and Einstein has to go back to work at the carwash, or The Goodwill sorting center or his plasma donation outlet.

His face has been pummeled by a really angry guy who has just been served a perfect cheeseburger after a hard day of really working, and the innocent guy is miffed.

So, the now sober townie is asked by his equally squalid friends what happened. And he doesn't want to admit the truth. So through his remaining eleven teeth (you'll remember that one aspect of a townie is that they have the same number of teeth as toes) he whimpers...

"It was a gang, I tell ya.' It was six, no fourteen bikers/cowboys/stevedores with wrought iron muscles, each one carrying a dozen weapons. Of course, I successfully fought them all off bravely, until another twenty jumped me from behind..."

Yakkety, yakkety. If I've heard this story once...

My question is simply this. Why do you so easily believe the idiot, and not me?

pax
December 7, 2007, 12:45 PM
And with that -- this thread has wandered a long way from realistically discussing strategies and tactics.

Closed.

pax