# Ponder the Unthinkable (pt9) Offense, Projection



## Winston (Nov 22, 2014)

_For those that have read the previous installments, I apologize for the long gap between postings._


In my last section, I hope that I was able to highlight the futility of planning your 
survival based on passive measures.  You can't dig in, hide and armor-up and expect to be 
safe.  In a SHTF (Stuff Hits The Fan) or WROL (Without Rule OF Law) scenario, 
passivity equals death.  Knowing when to move, and when to strike, are as vital as having 
food and water.  Maybe more so.

When most people talk about "defense", they mean offense.  If you must shoot an 
armed burglar,  that's offense.  You go to court, explain the circumstances, and are 
acquitted.  In a WORL setting, the intensity and frequency of such encounters will 
increase greatly.  The main difference is that instead of a five to ten minute police 
response time, the "good guys" may arrive sometime between now, or never.  Your 
actions are between you and God.  And inaction simply means you see Him sooner.

You must be ready, mentally.  This is not the realm of bloodthirsty murderers or 
sociopaths.   Those that plan, and have fortitude will survive.  If your philosophical 
system is non-violence, I respect that.  And in all seriousness, good luck.  You'll need a 
lot of that.   The rest of you need to deal with whatever moral reservations you may have.  
Now. When you must use force, the distraction of moral uncertainty is the fulcrum on 
where life and death pivot.  As a wise man once said, Do or Do Not.
　

It's all about Power Projection.  England kicked butt back in the day because her 
Longbowmen could hurl death upon calvary and footsoldiers at distances of hundreds of 
yards.  The Allies won World War II because we had strategic bombers and could flatten 
Axis production and infrastructure with impunity.  But bows are difficult for most people, 
and it's hard to find parking for a B-29 bomber (and they're pretty loud).  So, the way the 
average 21st century citizen projects power is with a firearm.  Think "Rock, Paper, 
Scissors (Lizard, Spock).  Spear beats Knife, Pistol beats Spear, Rifle Beats Pistol.  Those 
are the simple rules.  The idea is to be able to strike at your opponent outside of their 
ability (range) to respond.  

For example, a shotgun is deadly up close, but generally ineffective past fifty 
yards.  If some 12th century British Bowmen happen to be handy (due to a time/space 
displacement event?), the shotgunner is dead.  Pikemen were used effectively until the 
Seventeenth century, when Musket Infantry spread across Europe (100 yard volley fire 
beats 9 foot stab thrusts).  These illustrations are exceptions to try to get you to visualize 
distance and it's impact on lethality. 

Before detailing the use and employment of modern firearms, allow me just 
another minute to explain the progression of historical weapons.  Pre-literate man hurled 
rocks and wielded tree limbs. Fighting was kept to a minimum because if I can clobber 
you with a club, then you can reciprocate.  Then, after learning how to hunt using spears 
with stone tips, man figured how to turn these weapons on his fellow man.  The problem 
was, if you throw a spear at a man, and miss, he can throw it back at you (unlike a 
gazelle).  So, the first weapon of war was developed:  the mace.  You fashion a long, 
straight staff (appx 6 to 8 feet) and tie a large rock at the end.  The idea was, if your 
opponent is swinging a club, or stabbing with a stone knife, you clobber him on the gourd 
outside of his reach.  Simple.  It was so effective, the first armies of Sumer and The 
Lower Kingdom fielded armies of macemen.  At the onset of The Bronze Age, metal 
tipped arrows changed the balance of power.  Welcome to the arms race.

Thanks for bearing with the historical digression.  The issue is, you can't know 
where you're going if you don't know where you've been.  Combat, be it armies or 
individuals, is won not by the strongest, but those most adept to change (to paraphrase 
Darwin).  You don't get to pick your weapons once you're in a life or death situation.  If 
you do, your choices will probably be less than adequate.

Get your head straight, and think about where you are, and your limitations.  In 
some jurisdictions, you may not have legal access to pistols. Or maybe, a standard 12 
gauge shotgun has more recoil than you can handle. Rifles tend to over-penetrate, and are 
a poor choice for high-density areas.  All these issues can be overcome with some 
planning.  

What can't be overcome is compromise.  Don't even think about "less than lethal" 
options.  In a SHTF scenario, it's life or death.  Not "I'm going to disable him until the 
police arrive".  Ain't gonna happen.  You not only need to project power, but confidence.  
A weapon that may or may not disable an assailant gives the bad guy the thought that 
their assault may succeed.  Conversely, your confidence that you can inflict death or great 
bodily injury will deter most.  For the rest, your direct and immediate action will stop 
them. 

And when dealing with a possible assailant, maintain at least a ten foot buffer.  A 
mildly socially adept assailant can talk and distract you while creeping forward slowly.  
They will either get within arms reach or make you back-peddle into an unfavorable 
position.  Don't let that happen, and for God's sake, don't blabber "Stop, or I'll shoot!".  
As he steps forward, you breath deep take up the slack on the trigger. 

On that note, never fire once when two or three are available.  First shot lethality 
varies. Your life, and the safety of your loved ones,  is worth the extra shot or two.

In the next section, I'll be covering the types of firearms, ammo and their use.  If 
you already own a gun, you should take this opportunity to evaluate it's potential 
effectiveness in a SHTF or WORL event.  If you don't own one, I'll explain their 
strengths and weaknesses as well as their utility and necessity in an emergency.  

Don't go shopping without talking to an expert, and train.  Practice before ever 
using any firearm.  Then practice some more.  If you have a firearm, secure it.  There are 
many options available to suit a variety of circumstances.

Be safe.  Stay safe.


----------



## Plasticweld (Nov 22, 2014)

I like the historical digression as that will be realistic for someone who has not planned, it will all boil down to sticks and stones. 

The one thing that did catch my eye was your 10 foot buffer zone.  Law enforcement uses a 21 foot rule, for legal purposes it is called the Tutlur (not sure on spelling) rule.  It takes a grown man 2 1/2 seconds to cover 21 feet, the average time that it to draw from a duty holster.  A cop can legally kill a potential assailant with a knife who is threating him if under that distance.

Good read thanks for sharing...Bob


----------



## Winston (Nov 29, 2014)

Plasticweld said:


> ...The one thing that did catch my eye was your 10 foot buffer zone.  Law enforcement uses a 21 foot rule, for legal purposes it is called the Tutlur (not sure on spelling) rule.  It takes a grown man 2 1/2 seconds to cover 21 feet, the average time that it to draw from a duty holster.  A cop can legally kill a potential assailant with a knife who is threating him if under that distance...Bob



Yes sir, that's been in the news recently.  Unfortunately.
In a SHTF scenario, 21 feet may not even be enough (especially if your assailant has a rifle).  Still, I stand corrected.  Must have been thinking yards.
Always appreciate your thoughtful reading and response.

And for your consideration:
http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2007/10/rethinking-the-21-foot-rule.aspx


----------



## interactive (Dec 21, 2014)

10 foot buffer zone for police would be death . Recent Ferguson Missouri situation was 31 feet & even so assailant 
ended  up at policemen's feet as he did run towards cop .

Nice information , Makes me realize how humans can't escape violence


----------



## Winston (Dec 21, 2014)

An exact number of feet, yards, inches, is irrelevant as every situation is unique.  Police during "normal times" have a set of legal rules and department guidelines to follow, as well as their common sense.  In a SHTF scenario, the only one that matters is the latter.

If a group of potential assailants are threatening my family from the end of our driveway (appx 100 feet), they're not getting any closer.  Period.  There is no "rule".  If, or when, order is re-established, there's an old axiom:  "It's better to be tried by twelve than carried by six".


----------



## ppsage (Dec 21, 2014)

> Pre-literate man hurled rocks and wielded tree limbs.


 You don't mean pre-literate which includes most people up until the nineteenth century. ----------------- Even most paleolithic societies of which we have evidence wielded stone-tipped spears and perhaps hafted stone hammer deals. Although it seems logical, probably there's no evidence for rock throwing and branches outside the movies. I would personally find this historical weapon's evolution aside more convincing if restricted to the archaeologically demonstrable, of which there would be ample. Also the extent of organized violent human interaction in early pre-history is quite problematic, both in terms of artifacts and necessity. In the paleolithic, humans in the landscape are exceedingly sparse, there is plenty of room to settle disputes by separation. It's also a time when defense is much easier and superior to offense; a few guys on a cliff can defend a grain cache against all comers, which would be necessarily few in any case.


----------



## Winston (Dec 21, 2014)

> Fighting was kept to a minimum because if I can clobber you with a club, then you can reciprocate.



Sorry if you missed this sentence immediately following the one you quoted.  Of course, violence was kept to a minimum in _pre-bronze age societies,_ as individuals had little to gain and much to lose. Before the early, organized empires of antiquity (usually noted for their ability to write, as well as wage war), I have no idea if people used tree branches, or tickled each other with chicken feathers.  Admittedly, I'm not an anthropologist, and there is no written record.  

None of this has any bearing on the core of the article, other than "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight" or "A club to a spear fight".  My apologies if that was unclear.


----------



## ppsage (Dec 21, 2014)

No need to apologize. I can see how those civilizations would be characterized as literate. Not sure it's anthropology, maybe sociology, but the term raises in my mind a situation before literacy playing a role in the lives of individuals. Like after the era of rhetoric. I see now what is meant, but I hold to my notion that a more effective term might be found. Empires of antiquity seems perfect in this spot.


----------

