One of the prevailing myths out there about armed self-defense is that you mustn’t draw unless you’re going to shoot. In a word, BULLSHIT! How do people who propound that crap reconcile their advice with the fact that in every single study of DGUs (defensive gun usages) the overwhelming majority end with the bad guy fleeing or surrendering without a shot being fired once the good guy or gal draws down on him?
In my basic classes I spend over an hour on the psychology and tactics of taking violent men at gunpoint. I’ve done it dozens of times myself and never had a negative comeback from it. In several of those instances, if I hadn’t drawn down on them when I did, I would probably have had to shoot them…if I hadn’t waited too long to make that possible, in which case I wouldn’t be alive to be writing this.
One who agrees with me, and has seen the same BS propounded by police supervisors, is the renowned self-defense expert “Hock” Hockheim. Here’s what he has to say on the topic.
Folks, as always, your comments (and your own experiences in this regard) are invited.
I remember reading about proposals to require officers to file incident reports every time they removed their service weapon from the holster and even devices to report/record this. Not sure if that was ever implemented anywhere. It would be akin to requiring a homeowner to leave his pistol locked in the safe until the home invaders shoot at him. We have become a nation of a multitude of stupid rules, laws and technology all purported to keep bad things from happening but ultimately just putting us under the thumb of bureaucrats and nitwits.
Armed citizen here. Never had to draw on a person, though I have come close a couple of times. One time I had my hand on revolver in coat pocket. Is there a word for simulating having a gun but really having one? Another time, I deliberately let a meth head see my gun (in holster) as I was moving to cover behind my truck. Both times the threat backed off. Neither was showing a weapon though either could have easily overpowered me and could have had a concealed weapon. I think an important issue is taking away the surprise factor from them.
I have drawn several times on large, hostile furry things but that is a different issue.
The first paragraph takes me back to when I heard a white shirt type from the local major city PD proclaim that glow in the dark handgun sights weren’t needed. If you couldn’t see your sights, you couldn’t identify a threat. Or words to that effect. At the time I recognized that he obviously hadn’t been hanging out in same dark places I was for professional reasons. Locally, I’ve heard a few whoppers but aren’t sure if they were mistaken “common knowledge” or someone was actually teaching that.
The concept of the gun in the holster unless it’s going to be immediately fired suggests the person either fears liability, has a “safety” complex or has been reading too much Elmore Leonard/ watching Justified. They certainly don’t understand the OODA loop.
As a private citizen, I’ve been the intended victim of half a dozen (+1?) armed robberies. All but one (?) came to a screeching halt upon the appearance of a firearm at the low ready. Only in the very first instance was speed of response an issue. The gent in question had flagged himself earlier as a probable threat. [very inept, first timer?] Cued by a furtive movement consistent with drawing a gun, he was the only one I actually covered with a gun. As he spun toward me while going into his version of a gunman’s crouch, he saw the muzzles of a double barreled shotgun and froze. It was a small town with just one cop on duty and no way to contact him, so I let the guy go.
OK, why didn’t I shoot? Two reasons. I was clerking in the LGS and earlier, with no customers, I’d checked the loads in the hidden shotguns. I was horrified to find they were loaded with birdshot. IMHO, not a viable choice at ~25 feet. I had two available when he entered, but wasn’t comfortable. Secondly, while the guy was facing me and crouching, his elbow suggested his hand was still on the gun and it was still in the holster/belt. Told that if his elbow moved……he was vary compliant. I bought buckshot on the way to work in the morning.
In some states, it seems that you only have permission to draw when circumstances (imminent, unavoidable, deadly threat) allow you to shoot. But, this doesn’t mean a shot is mandatory. The decision to draw and the decision to shoot/refrain are separate decisions made about 3 seconds apart (for us mere mortals with a slow draw to shot cycle). The decision to draw is made when the attack is imminent. The decision to call off the shot is made about 2-3 seconds later when you see your attacker retreat upon regret of his victim selection. The result is a draw with no shot fired, but that result comes about from making two separate decisions in very close proximity of time. You must always be prepared to call off the shot after making the decision to draw.
Mas,
As you know, I had an armed encounter many years ago. It worked exactly like you say. I drew my gun, he stopped, and when he was given the opportunity, he ran away. I didn’t have to shoot, for which, I am extremely grateful. I would have shot if he had kept coming, because I truly believe that he would have killed me if I hadn’t. As I learned many years later, the woman he attacked before me was killed. I was prepared to shoot. I am very thankful that I didn’t need to do so. I would have gladly gotten away from him without drawing the gun, if I could have done so, but every move I made, he moved to block me. He was bigger than me, stronger than me, and the only reason I’m here today, is I had the gun with me. If I had left the gun in the car, I would never have gotten to it. I’ve learned many lessons from you over the years, but your advice in a book, long before I ever met you, saved my life that day and I thank you.
Bonnie Young
To me it all comes down to CYA – just like the rest of justifying defensive action of any kind. Threatening someone with a firearm is usually acceptable as long as you can justify it and articulate that justification, realizing that justification may be more difficult in some jurisdictions. And as in other uses of force, there is a continuum of gun use – from placing your hand on the gun in the holster to drawing the gun but not pointing it at a perceived threat (“draw to ready” or having it in your hand but behind your leg) to pointing the gun directly at a threat.
Had a co-worker who had that “if I draw it, I’m going to use it” attitude – I tried to explain the pitfalls of that approach, not sure if it registered. I also try to explain those sorts of things to my students, I think most get the concept. It’s all a balance between being ready to act as quickly as possible and not acting so soon that undesirable legal consequences may come into play.
Thank you for bringing this up. The dubious policy of committing oneself prematurely or irrevocably to a course of action obviously needs a lot of exposure. Some people are likely to maneuver, draw, and shoot just in case an apparent gun handler is one of those people. The folks who appear to be pointing a barrel at someone from inside a pocket should also consider that they appear to be making a provokingly questionable furtive move that may justify a preemptive retaliation. Too much dubious firearms policy does seem to stem from imitating play acting on stage and screen. Motives are too easily misinterpreted.
Both times I’ve used a gun to defend myself or others it was a double-barrel shotgun and I kept it at low ready throughout the incident, careful not to point it at anyone (not out of concern for them, but a good gun handling habit – I didn’t intend to kill anything). Showing the gun produced a willingness to negotiate. In today’s environment, however, given the propensity for attackers to become “victims,” someone using a handgun for defense needs to be very familiar with the laws of their state, the duty to retreat, etc.
I drew on a hundred occasions…it always worked in my case (except 2) . Why would one wait in order to be ready?
Detroit, Michigan
Circa 2005
Comerica Park
I was leaving a meeting late at night with two coworkers. My 45 came to the meeting with us. As we were heading to the parking lot, a man about 6’6” approached us. There wasn’t anyone else around, and he was heading straight for us. All the while, I noticed he was looking left, looking right, looking behind him, etc. He was walking faster than we were, and he was walking faster than a normal person would.
He got to a point that made me uncomfortable. I put my hand on my 45 and stated to him that I was armed. He did a 180 and jogged away.
I am convinced to this day that he meant us harm.
Thanks, Mas!! I took a MAG 20 Classroom class from you years ago in Hayden, ID. One comment you made has stuck with me through the years. And; that is: If you wait to see the barrel pointed at you, you will likely see what comes out if it. Sorry if the paraphrase is not precise.
This idea (don’t draw a gun unless you use it) is just a re-casting of the old trope that “A warrior who draws his sword cannot sheath it unbloodied”. See this link:
https://wewererogue.tumblr.com/post/187808737121/the-draw-sword-draw-blood-trope-fact-and
Replace “sword” with a “gun” and it is the same idea.
It is a romantic concept, I suppose, but not very realistic (as is pointed out above).
One sees this idea in books and films from time to time. For example, in the book “Dune”, by Frank Herbert, the Lady Jessica is presented a Crysknife by a Fremen woman. The woman shows the blade to Jessica and then sheaths the crysknife before handing it to her. Lady Jessica tells the woman that she has sheathed the Crysknife unbloodied. The woman, in repentance (I suppose), exposes her bare chest and exclaims “Take the Water of my Life (i.e. her blood). Jessica, mercifully, just inflicts a light cut before sheathing the blade.
Anyone who promotes such ideas has been watching too many Hollywood movies. As we all know, that is a terrible source for tactical knowledge! 🙂
Like My Darling Clementine, in which Pop Clanton tells his sons “When ya pull a gun, kill a man!” Definitely not good advice for a law-abiding citizen – or for that matter, a modern criminal. (Homicide generally gets gets a much bigger reaction than armed robbery.)
Yes. Also in another Henry Fonda movie, ‘Firecreek’, where he plays an outlaw named Bob Larkin. This quote was:
Bob Larkin: “It’s a lesson I learned a long time ago. A man worth shootin’ is a man worth killin’.”
In this movie, Bob Larkin drew his Colt 45 but he only shot to wound the town marshal (played James Stewart). Bob (later) came to regret his failure to “shoot to kill” and, thus, delivered the quote above.
Like I said, Hollywood is not the place to go for “real life” useful information. They are too invested in selling fantasy. Unfortunately, too many Americans have trouble separating fact from fantasy here in the 21st Century.
Sometimes it’s a shortcut. Meaning: don’t draw if you are not able to fire it, don’t draw for show only, if you won’t be able to actually shoot.
The only time I’ve pointed a firearm at someone here in the States was when I was in college living over a hardware store near campus. My wife had gone down the long flight of stairs with a landing in the middle to our front door, which had a set of 3-over-3 small windows above the wooden bottom. A very large man tried to grab her as she stepped out to get the paper (the WSJ before it went downhill…this was the early ’80’s). She evaded him and closed the door which locked behind her.
The guy busted the window nearest the doorknob, reached in, unlocked it and opened the door while she ran screaming up the stairs. I heard her and grabbed the only pistol I owned at the time, a Beretta 70S in .380 ACP and went out the apartment door just as she went in. The guy was half-way up the stairs and had paused on the landing to catch his breath (very large guy and very out of shape). There was a lightbulb in the stairwell so I had good lighting on him, and he could see me clearly. Without thinking I fell into the sort-of Weaver stance I use at the range, drew down on him in a two-hand hold, and pointed the pistol down the stairs right at the center of his chest.
The only thing that came to mind right then was the limited stopping-power of 8 rounds (7 plus 1) of the little .380, even stoked with the best round available at that time (“Silvertips” if I recall), and what I said to him was, “Take another step and I’ll empty the magazine”. He stopped to consider this while looking at the muzzle of the pistol (not wavering at all; I was quite calm, surprisingly), and without a word turned around and went back down the stairs and out the door.
My wife had already called both the campus police and then the regular PD, and I waited at the bottom of the stairs near the doorway for over half an hour, even though the campus police station was only a few blocks away. The city PD never bothered to send a unit.
There is exactly ZERO doubt in my mind that having the gun drawn and pointed steadily at this whacko is what prevented him from physically assaulting me and my wife in our own apartment building. I’m a small guy (5’7″) and somebody that big could have folded, spindled and mutilated me even as out of shape as he was had I not been armed.
My wife and I both had carry permits as soon as our state went “shall issue”. But never since that incident back in the early -80’s has one of my pistols been out of its holster, much less have I had to point it at someone, since then. I deterred a thief in the alley once when living in the Heart of the Hive™ by simply putting my hand on the grip of my pistol but never had to draw it. I hope that I never have to, but I also know that I will (and will use it) if I have to defend my wife or myself ever again.
I’ve used a firearm three times.
Once on two people attempted a strong armed robbery. Once to stop a vehicle that was driving on the perimeter road, refusing to stop, when working state corrections, and once on a family member trying to stab me.
Each time the action stopped when I produced a firearm so my justification for shooting was ended. So I could no longer legally fire and I’m glad I didn’t have to fire. I was prepared and willing to fire if the action had continued.
In another situation I sprayed someone who assaulted me with bear spray. If he had continued his assault I was going to the gun. To say that if you draw your gun you have to shoot is stupidity at its best. Encounters a fluid and change rapidly. What is legal in one moment may not be so a few seconds later.
You have to be able to change tactics on the fly. As for being prepared, and willing, to shoot they say inmates are pretty good at reading people. The inmates on that yard waited until my day off to have a stabbing on the rec yard as I usually worked the gun tower that oversaw the rec yard.
I’m glad I haven’t had to shoot anyone but it’s been close.
From Hockheim: “Citizens teaching gun courses and school and church-shooting courses, etc. I still think It’s a good thing overall because we’ve noticed they’ve-we’ve achieved a overall higher level of good material.”
Agreed. That’s my thing. (Even though I have Infantry experience, I’m not sure it’s terribly relevant to civilian gun use.) After all, somebody has to teach the “This is the end the bullet comes out of, so always point it in a safe direction” beginner students.
TN_MAN wrote:
The movie line:
“It’s a lesson I learned a long time ago. A man worth shootin’ is a man worth killin’.”
is wrong.
Obviously he’s right, don’t shoot to kill if you don’t have to.
BUT
The man who is not justified in shooting to kill; is not justified in shooting at all. A bullet anywhere can kill. They can bounce around inside the body and hit anything.
Never point a gun at anything if you are not willing to destroy it and anything behind it.
I wince when I see actors threaten innocents to get them to obey. Accidental discharges can happen to you too.
But yes, if the mugger is a long way off, you could try a disabling leg shot first. Come to think of it though; I’m having a hard time imagining when I could be certain I’m justified in killing and they are far enough away to have the time.
In the movie ‘Firecreek’, the outlaw Bob Larkin respected the local town marshal. He did not want to have to kill him. However, the town marshal (who was unarmed at the time) was threatening to come after Larkin (and his gang) and to (eventually) see them punished for their crimes. The plot of the movie was such that Larkin had to respond (or lose the respect of his followers) but, for an outlaw, he still had morals enough that he did not want to murder the town marshal in cold blood. Therefore, his solution was to draw his gun and deliberately give the marshal a non-fatal leg wound.
It was all drama being milked for the silver screen by Hollywood. As I said, fantasy rather than real life.
In the movie, the town marshal then (a) applied first aid to his leg wound, (b) armed himself, and then (c) took on Larkin and his gang (bad leg and all). As the marshal picked off the gang members, one by one, Larkin delivered his quote about killing someone if they are “worth shooting”.
None of this is reality. It was all classic “Old West” Hollywood Horse Oprah. In the real world, gunfights are brutal, bloody affairs with survival being the only measure of success.
My point being that Hollywood pushes fantasy that bears no relation to reality. Getting back to the topic of this blog, it is this kind of fantasy that sparks this idea that, if you are going to draw, you need to shoot. Or, as I noted, a Warrior cannot sheath his blade (or his gun) without drawing blood.
It is all fantasy sparked by Hollywood and books of fiction. Drama rather that reality. As I said, Hollywood is a particularly bad place to go for tactical advice or training. I am afraid that Hollywood inspires not only stupid acts by people (who should know better) but it also, sometimes, inspires the legislative efforts of the gun-grabbers. Why else do the grabbers insist on keeping suppressors on the NFA list? It is, purely, because they have seen fantasy assassins use suppressors for murder and violence, a thousand times, on the ‘Silver Screen’!
Hollywood indeed exhibits bad gun handling. They are going for drama, for suspense, to hold our interest, and to tell an interesting story. Real gunfights are usually over with quickly. That’s not very interesting in a movie which is 1 and a half or 2 hours long. Storytelling on a screen demands action, to hold our interest. That’s why you see so many car/horse/motorcyle chases. Fast action is visually interesting. That is good storytelling. Have you ever watched a sitcom or a soap opera where everyone gets along, and has pleasant conversations with each other? I doubt it. No, in order to create interest, the writers believe we need to see conflict.
So, yes, Hollywood gets gun stuff wrong, but if we realize what they are striving for, then we understand why truth is sacrificed in order to tell a more exciting story, and hold our interest, and sell tickets, and tell advertizers that a lot of eyeballs are watching our show, so advertize with us. Follow the money.
Prosecutor: “The defendant claimed he had time to attempt a ‘disabling leg shot’ because the person was too far away to immediately need killing. But the bullet hit the femoral artery and the other person is dead.”
*Not* going to sound good to a jury.
In the mini-series “Godless” the main character had to have his arm amputated due to a severe rifle wound but there were more disabling leg wounds than I could count. The victims all seemed to do just fine without surgery or antibiotics because the bullet “missed the bone.” 🤨
Quote of the Day:
“…but why get rid of the organ grinder and replace him with the monkey?”
Actor Gary Oldman (as Winston Churchill) in the Movie ‘Darkest Hour’ (2017)
You think of a woman with a Jamaican-American father as a ‘monkey’?
In the movie, Churchill was speaking of the change of administration of the British Government. Neville Chamberlain was being pushed out and there were those that wanted to put Chamberlain’s “Right-hand Man”, Halifax, in his place (in preference to Churchill). This caused Churchill to make the above observation.
Churchill was using a familiar figure-of-speech when he made this reference. See this link:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_organ_grinder,_not_the_monkey
Churchill was making the point that Halifax would not truly be in charge. That he would represent a continuation of the same failed polices that occurred under Chamberlain.
As far as our current political situation goes, there are marked similarities. Biden is being pushed out, just as Chamberlain was, and the proposed substitute is also lacking in leadership and (one suspects) would not be in-charge anymore that Biden himself.
As for your reference to the ancestry of Kamala Harris, she is clearly of mixed blood. It seems likely that she is descended from both slave-owners and slaves. See this link:
https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/14/looking-claims-kamala-harris-descendant-slave-owne/
However, I fail to see what that has to do with anything. It would be her competence that is questionable not her ancestry. Certainly, her term as “Border Czar” has been one of complete and total failure.
Hock invoked part of the force paradigm I invented (CAN MAY SHOULD MUST). He mentioned the CAN and SHOULD as applied to decision making to gunpoint.
I wrote about this in 2016, here: https://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=16150
With respect to gunpointing, the MAY is critical. Depending on state law, gunpointing may be nondeadly force as a matter of law, or it may be threatening of deadly force lawful only when use of deadly force is justifiable. In some jurisdictions, it may be even more complicated.
In Florida, a gunpoint accompanied by a verbal command or threat will likely be considered a threat of deadly force, or submitted to a jury for its determination, even though a mere gunpoint is the use of nondeadly force as a matter of law. I wrote about that for judges and lawyers, in September 2023, here, at p. 4: https://www.8jcba.org/page-18058
As always checking on one’ state statutes and caselaw is a must.
A very interesting topic to me as a non-LE citizen. I have been warned about “brandishing a weapon” but I have not educated myself as to the laws in my state. Interesting facts about my two occurrences though. Both occurred between the hours of 12:30am and 4am. Both were burglary attempts to enter my home and I was asleep. I did not have my dedicated pistol available but in my laziness I would just put hollow points in my “target guns” and go to bed. One time in my life I won free beer using these guns, shooting with my LE friends, one time only. This first gun was a .45 ACP 5″ 1911 and the second incidence I had a 6″ stainless GP-100 (.357). I showed the gun in both cases to the intruders one of which was inside my house. They just didn’t seem to like these guns at all and stopped immediately, thank God. They must have known what those guns meant. Both ended in arrest and no injuries whatsoever. Both perps had severe drug and alcohol issues. When they were arrested, neither one mentioned that I had a full size pistol in my hand. Never pointed the gun at either one. Hope they got some help. I know these stories never made any type of gun statistics, but I do have copies of the police reports. Now, I’m old and retired and live in a safer neighborhood! Stay safe, and always read Mas!
Thank you for this correction! Thinking that I should only draw to shoot nearly cost me an uphill legal battle and a would-be assailant his life. In the late 1980’s, as I was becoming old enough to purchase a handgun in Florida, I read many gun magazine articles and a few books. At the time, I routinely performed lengthy service calls in neighborhoods with crack houses and high crime rates, and I was hyper vigilant and more than a little scared for my safety.
During one service call, a large sturdy male took offense to my demeanor and began to challenge me to a fight. I tried several times to deescalate, and I had no ability to retreat, being pinned into a non-running vehicle with him standing just outside of the door.
I placed my hand on my handgun (S&W 4516) that was in the glovebox, and was preparing to draw and shoot if he continued in the loud and physical manner that he was displaying. I believed (in retrospect, perhaps unreasonably) that I was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, even though he appeared to be unarmed.
From my reading, I had concluded that if I drew the gun, my only option was to fire it at him. In reality, had I shown him the gun a little sooner (and been prepared to fire if he went for it) he would have probably walked away. To this day, I believe I would have been convicted of some lesser included offense under homicide had I fired on him.
Fortunately, a good samaritan intervened and ran off the crazed man just as I placed my hand on my weapon. Now I know it is better to point a weapon and gauge the response when needed. I believe this message should be repeated often in every conversation about defensive handgun use. Thank you, Mas!
I would have to make the comment – that it’s not about “You MUST” use the firearm the weapon if you draw it, or show it. but rather that you must be prepared to use the firearm.
If it’s an empty bluff & you’re not emotionally capable of pulling the trigger, then you’ve put yourself into a worse position.
Comments are closed.