"The Impact of Killing" - re: soldiers but relevant for everyone

[jcims]

Pretty good article, especially sections that talk about the physiological response to fear and having to pull the trigger.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...emes/prep.html

[JohnKSa]

This is a very important subject for anyone who owns a firearm for the purpose of self-defense.

[crashresidue]

Cheers,

This IS the most through article dealing with killing another human being I've ever read.

It should be a manditory READ for every person who believes in "self preservation" with a firearm.

I was STUNNED!

cr

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Here's a thread I started a few months ago on a similar subject with some good books recommended.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...highlight=PTSD

Many of the classes I've taken mention these problems to the students. The PBS report is a great read.

I've seen Klinger (one of the books at conferences) and I saw him on the tube on a CourtTV show discussing police shootings.

[JohnKSa]

IMO, this topic is not only useful for the purposes of understanding and dealing with PTSD (an after the fact issue), but also for the purpose of understanding the built-in reticence of normal humans to kill one of their own kind.

There is significant research to indicate that the vast majority of people are virtually unable to kill another human without the proper conditioning. That's something that everyone who owns a gun for the purposes of self-defense needs to consider.

[oldbillthundercheif]

A fellow named Dave Grossman wrote a book a while back called "On Killing"...

It is a damn fine book. He posits that the process of killing your fellow man is not just about conditioning and the person's pre-existing mental state, but also about distance. Pushing a button and blowing up the blurry image of a person on a video screen is much less likely to cause PTSD and people in general are much more willing to do it.

I have not found this to be entirely accurate as my father constantly thought about all the Japanese pilots and aircrew he shot down in the pacific and fully expected to meet them in the afterlife:
"I think when I die there may be a few dozen japs waiting for me at the gates of heaven... I hope I still get in" -Pop

I know that I still think about the folks who may have met their end as a direct result of my actions in military aviation. It may not qualify as PTSD, but I think about it a lot and it bothers me plenty so this distance hypothesis may not be the whole story.

Either way, it's a good book and I agree with most of it.

[revjen45]

Anyone who isn't affected by killing another person is called a sociopath. Killing in self defense is something you would do only because NOT doing it is the only thing uglier than doing it. I would shoot to defend my home and family, but I'm sure that it would affect me and if I could avoid it I would. OTOH, those who place innocent people in fear of being killed or maimed have no legitimate complaint when their chickens come home to roost.

[Al Norris]

A couple of things I'd like to comment upon.

Originally Posted by David Grossman

But if we haven't prepared ourselves emotionally for the act ahead of time, and we just tricked you into killing, the magnitude of the trauma can be significant, because we're having to live with something that your body says is not right, that you didn't want to do, and you were simply tricked into killing.

Forget for the moment that David is talking about Combat. Just consider the statements made about having to shoot and kill someone in response to a deadly threat.

The potential's there to be devastated and psychologically destroyed by that act.

If you haven't made the mental adjustments necessary, in almost all cases, you will suffer for it. Perhaps as much as is indicated above. But...

Each of us handles stress differently. And each stressful event is different from the previous event.

Originally Posted by Dr. Mathew Friedman

For some people, and for police personnel as well, killing can be the most devastating issue. But for other people, the killing isn't. They feel quite justified that it was him or me: "If I didn't kill this individual, so-and-so would have gotten attacked. I was doing my duty." Different people will experience the same event in very different ways based on what their understanding of the event is, what their understanding of the alternatives are, what their past experience is. So it's not a simple question.

Catch that last part? What your past experiences are, will determine in some respect how you handle the current event and what you experience after the event.

This is a topic that doesn't get discussed enough. Most people who get guns for self/home defense don't train. Most of the people who get concealed permits don't train any further than what's required to get the permit. These are observable facts. For many that do train more, target practice is often the only other form of training they get.

Does anyone seriously think this is all the training you need?

Of course, those of you that do go further and take some actual gun-fighting training, do you think that's all there is to it?

Unless your training includes the mental preparation necessary for killing, you ain't trained yet. Nor is it easy to prepare for an act that you have never done and in all honesty, you may never do.

One of the reasons that these discussions run short, is because there will inevitably be the poster who comes along and says that while he has never killed anyone, he has no doubt that he can. Some of these will even say that the act of killing a human will have no effect upon them.

At this point, I can only shake my head in pity for that person. Learning can only take place when the student is willing to be taught.

[JohnKSa]

What your past experiences are, will determine in some respect how you handle the current event and what you experience after the event.

There are varying views on this. I think everyone agrees that conditioning can help a person deal with this. However it's also been shown that a small percentage of the population just doesn't seem to have a problem with it. I definitely don't think that the average person is going to be conditioned to handle killing simply by virtue of past experiences. The kind of experiences that would provide that kind of conditioning are rare.

One of the reasons that these discussions run short, is because there will inevitably be the poster who comes along and says that while he has never killed anyone, he has no doubt that he can. Some of these will even say that the act of killing a human will have no effect upon them.

Exactly. While there is a small part of the population for which this might be true, the odds are heavily against it. And more to the point, it's not something you can take a test for to find the answer ahead of time.

The choice is to either get the training you need ahead of time or just wait to see what's going to happen. Based on some of the studies I've seen, waiting to see can provide some pretty unexpected results. And I'm NOT just talking about the aftermath.

[Socrates]

I've been in two instances where I had to make a choice between killing or maiming. First one the guy was bigger then I was, considerably, but, he had a bad knee. I decided getting away was the better choice, because his size dictated picking points of attack that might harm him forever, like eyes, throat, etc.

The second, I had little choice. I resigned myself to attacking the second the Walther PPKS was pointed at me, and, taking the guys out as quick as I possibly could. However, again, it was the last choice. I was lucky. He just hit me over the head with it, and allowed me to sink down, like I was really hurt, but, ready to spring. I don't remember how I got out, if I got out first, or they left. I think the three of them took off, not wanting to face the cops my yelling was sure to bring.

It's a very strange feeling to say to yourself,
"Well, it's a beautiful day to die."
But, not going into that shock state probably saved my life, both times.
Guess that 20 years of martial arts and boxing came in handy for something...

S

[Al Norris]

There are varying views on this.

Agreed.

Since I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination, what I say is entirely based upon my own observations during combat. I have only drawn once as a civilian and did not have to fire. As such, I can only extrapolate what I have experienced.

For example. When I came back from Vietnam, I didn't touch a gun for about ten years. I had sworn to myself that I would never kill another man again. Famous last words! I was drawn back into guns through hunting with some of my buddies. Another friend introduced me into the concepts of second amendment activism. I got my first handgun in '97. I have held a CWP since 2000, 3 months after I joined TFL.

Briefly stated, I've been inside the looking glass and back out again. Full circle. Which is what I base this particular opinion upon.

[JohnKSa]

To clarify, it's clear that a person's background will affect how they handle this kind of situation, but I think that's primarily talking about degrees of catastrophe. In other words, the vast majority of people are going to be severely traumatized and their background will determine whether it incapacitates them totally or just causes them extreme mental distress.

The people who handle killing well are either pre-conditioned and counseled properly (before and after) or they're one of the very small part of the population that seems to be "immune". I tend to think that even with all the proper conditioning and counseling, most people are still going to have some pretty major problems--just much less severe than would be normal.

When I came back from Vietnam, I didn't touch a gun for about ten years.

Did you get any sort of counseling from the military or did they just set you adrift?

[Socrates]

My dad was a gunnery control officer, on a destroyer, in WWII.
He said the war really affected him, way more then we ever knew.

God Bless him.

S

[dfaugh]

This is a very difficult topic, as killing someone else is a very personal experiance.

I just finished reading a book called "SHooter" about a sniper in Afganistan/Iraq. According to him, its "no big deal" to pull that trigger....The enemy were simply "targets" that had to be eliminated. Not onlewas he willing to do it, he was eager to go "hunting". I wonder what he'll feel when it all catches up with him in 20 years.

I suffer for PTSD, which never came back to bite me, for almost 30 years. I now understand why my father wouldn't talk about his WWII experiences for many years.

[Al Norris]

John, the quick and easy answer is that I received no counseling prior to being discharged.

[Baba Louie]

Death is an unknown and unwelcome foreigner in todays world and our culture has evolved to a point where death is almost feared rather than embraced. Or perhaps that should be worded, where life is be embraced, revered, worshipped... and death, especially causing or bringing about a death, foists a great burden upon those equal (perhaps) only to being shunned by society. The mark of Cain, as it were (as the ancient Hebrews called it).

Our children do not die due to lack of medical care as they once did. Our wives do not die in childbirth. Our life expectency has been increased. Our working conditions enhanced.

We do not count coup or wear feathers in our hair for acts of bravery.

The taking of a life is almost always judged to be morally reprehensible by those who were not there and is certainly not a day to day occurance.

Soldiers and LEOs have their buddies, Chaplains, etc to help decompress if they desire. Grievious injury or Death is, unfortunately (a loaded word choice), a part of their job, their life. Sad that. But necessary in a way.

I have seen it's effect in my own family, where it is not openly discussed, but those men (4 uncles, 1 cousin) so affected, altered their lives such that they depend now more on their faith and by helping others. When I was a kid, I revered them for their heroics (real or perceived) in combat. As I aged, more for their inner strengths and wisdom. They are (were) excellent shots, but no longer hunt.

That, in and of itself, says a lot to me.

Life is to be revered. Death comes at a price. Sounds simple in theory.

In practice...

[Walter]

Did you get any sort of counseling from the military or did they just set you adrift?

Puh-LEESE!!!

My second tour of Viet Nam ended in Feb. 1970. Both tours ended with
a flight back to CONUS aboard a USAF hospital plane, and my eventual deposit at Oak Knoll Naval Hospital in Oakland.
If you were openly hostile, you would probably be sent to the "psycho" ward
there, but otherwise, you were assigned to a bed, and pretty much ignored,
except for treating physical wounds. I never heard of any "counceling" being available, and I never talked with anybody who received any counceling for
combat-related emotional problems.
It might have been good if we could have had a little help with the "traumatic-stress" related problems some of us developed later, but that just wasn't there,then. And for many combat vets, it wasn't there in time to do any good. Myself included.

But I thought the article was very good, and a "must-read" for anybody who
intends to carry a handgun for self-defense.

Walter

[JohnKSa]

It might have been good if we could have had a little help with the "traumatic-stress" related problems some of us developed later, but that just wasn't there,then. And for many combat vets, it wasn't there in time to do any good. Myself included.

That's very unfortunate.

I don't agree with everything Grosman says, but his two books contain a lot of good information. I'd say they're worth the read for anyone who's been placed in a deadly force situation or who seriously contemplates the use of deadly force for self-defense.

[Al Norris]

Walter, I hate to use you as a stereotype, but your resentments just prove the case. Don't get me wrong, as I agree with you. The war changed you, as it did myself. As it does many (if not most) of those who go to war.

And that's the point of this thread. If the military, who are trained by dehumanizing the foe; trained to kill and are subsequently affected by such actions, how much more so, the average Joe or Jane on the street?

People who don't seriously consider the ultimate effect of pulling and shooting in self-defense, are in for a very rude awakening. It can be a life-changing situation. It can be a life-destroying situation.

We have all ran through various shooting scenarios. The reason we do this is to mentally (and in many types of training, physically) prepare ourselves for something we really don't want to have to do.

I don't have the answer for how to effectively train for this. For me, part of the answer is to encourage and enhance what could be called, The Warrior Mentality. To make the connection that if someone threatens my life or my loved ones lives, then they deserve what they get. At some gut level, I have to understand that all the legalities aside, the other person merits whatever befalls them. The legalities will sort themselves out, only if I survive the encounter.

[shep854]

Massad Ayoob goes into the fallout of a defensive killing in his writings. A key point he brings out is the importance of positive reinforcement after a deadly force encounter. He has cited many accounts of officers who suffered terribly after a "righteous shooting" because of vilification by superiors and the legal system. When the officer (or citizen) received support from peers and family, the level of stress was much lower.

BTW, Grossman co-authored a science fiction novel, The Two-Space War, with Leo Frankowski. In it, many of his conclusions are described and discussed.

[Walter]

Walter, I hate to use you as a stereotype, but your resentments just prove the case. Don't get me wrong, as I agree with you. The war changed you, as it did myself. As it does many (if not most) of those who go to war.

Antipitas, no problem. I try really hard not to let the lingering hostility get
through, but sometimes I just utterly fail. I finally came to grips with the
fact that "THAT" war is over, and I have, mostly, gotten over it.

But I still realize that a face-to-face confrontation that results in gunfire
is going to be a traumatic experience, regardless of the outcome. And I
would never try to minimize that.

People who don't seriously consider the ultimate effect of pulling and shooting in self-defense, are in for a very rude awakening. It can be a life-changing situation. It can be a life-destroying situation.

That idea is one of the main points stressed in the Texas CCL training class,
and it cannot be stated enough.

Walter

[BlueTrain]

Some people wouldn't even kill an animal, you know. People are much more sensitive about killing animals than people used to be, possibly because you are more removed from the actual raising and butchering animals. It might be nothing more than squemishness in spite of the fact that I, at least, must see 30 dead deer on the road in the course of a year and some of them look awful. However, I don't think people even two hundred years ago were any less sensitive to killing than they are now, in spite of it being somewhat more common in some places (the Indian wars). Even in backwoods frontier communities, people did not get away with murder.

This thread, however, is mainly about self-defense shootings and killing in wartime. Judging from my father's comments, I would say that people may create psycological self-defense mechanisims that allow them to carry on under brutal conditions. People can refuse to think about things if they are far enough away or overjoyed that they lived through it for another day that nothing else matters. As far as not being bothered by events until much later, that may be because men just getting out of the service usually have so many other things on their minds, raising families and holding a job, that only later they begin to think of all they had done or didn't do. For that matter, that would be true for whatever it was you were doing when you were younger.

My father was perfectly willing to speak of his wartime experiences, which were in Italy and later for a year, a POW camp. Incidentally, he took his training at Ft. Knox, so did I and so did my son, who is now serving in Iraq.

Concerning police shootings, it has been pointed out that by a DC policeman that when they are in a shootout, it bothers the policemen for weeks, yet when they track down a shooting suspect, usually at his home, they will often as not find them in bed fast asleep. So there might be such a thing as a killer instinct. All the same there are still plenty of cases where the police shoot people around here.

[mr kablammo]

The Wall Street Journal did an article derived from the journal Military Review. The author of the Miltary Review article, Maj Kilner, wrote on the need of the military to ensure that killing the enemy was put in a context of justice. I could not find the original but here is a link to Military Review. Browse at your pleasure.

http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/C...sh/english.asp

[MicroBalrog]

I think the problem here is that people don't often take into account the Big Picture [tm] of violence and combat.

Now, hte thing is, if you're going to be in a situation where people are actively seeking to kill you, you will get hurt.

Not necessarily physically. Maybe intellectually and psychologically like those people in the article. Maybe in some other way.

But the point is, if you get into a violent encounter, it's not likely things will be peachy-rosey-okay afterwards. You don't just 'shoot the bad guy' and treturn to normal life.

Sure, sometimes this happens.

But it happens very rarely.

Maybe you will 'just' suffer from PTSD.

Maybe you will 'just' be dragged through the courts and lose thousands of dollars defending yourself.

Maybe you will 'just' get injured instead of what the bad guy wanted to do originally.

But you will be hurt.

And people who are not ready to realize that are not yet ready for a 'real situation', no matter how shiny their Bad-Guy-Smasher-Terrorist-Pulverizer-2000 is.

Just a few cents...

[Socrates]

I figure that if I actually had to defend myself, with a gun, or hands, and I killed, or severely injured someone, that would end my life as I know it.

First, I'd likely have to move, since I'd loose my job, and, probably face misdemeanor or felony illegally carrying a loaded weapon, depending upon the situation, and the results. All of my firearms would be gone for 3 years, due to probation. Next would be fear of retaliation by family or gang from the dead party. etc.

No, it would have to be very clearly my life, or my SO's, in danger.

I never took that lightly with martial arts, always choosing to avoid a conflict, or minimize it, if possible.

I've also found that as hunters get older, they tend to loose their desire to kill. As one guy put it
"What if when I go up to the Pearl gates I was wrong, and God's an elephant?"

Some people don't see it that way. In Hawaii, guy tried to beat me up, and he couldn't. Easily evaded, and called the police. The officer(the guys uncle) asked me why, with my martial arts background, and conditioning, I didn't beat the s.... out of him, just to teach him a lesson. Answered I don't take lightly fighting big guys, because I may have to do something that won't heal to save myself. Blinding someone is not something I take lightly.
Next day I got a call from the guy that tried to beat me up.
His uncle DID beat the tar out of him, then told him to apologize, or he was going to his own prison(guy was a prison guard) ;-)
Right result, and, I didn't have to get my hands dirty...

S