Family defense?

G

Glamdring

New member
Is defending your family different than self defense. I don't mean legally.

I have kicked this idea around a little bit with others and haven't reached any firm conclusions.

If both you and your SO have kids and TSHTF does it make sense to have one of you engage or perform suppressive fire while the other get's the kids out of Dodge? Similar to VIP protection.

Or would it make more sense to both seek cover with kids and take/assign sectors of fire?

I know some of it is situation dependant. I am looking for some ideas to develope a short list of Imediate Action Drills.

Also how would weapon's availible to you and your SO affect plan? If one is stuck with only a mouse gun due to clothing or event or one member is carrying weapons for both due to constraints.

For personal defense I basically use a modified version of the response to a near or far ambush. They are either close enough you banzia/berserk into them. Or if they are far enough away, you move to avoid contact/keep them at a distance so superior skills can be effective.

Or you see a potential attack and prepare a "hasty ambush" ie take cover and start planning exscape route.

Don't get me wrong I am not a Rambo wannabe. I just feel that small unit tactics have more of a history and substance to them than what a lot of "gun rag experts" spout.

YMMV
 
My first and primary responsibility is to the safety of my children. That means my wife gets them as far away from the threat as is feasible. I cover their retreat and if the opportunity presents itself, neutralize the attack by whatever means are appropriate. If I can render assisitance to other innocent parties without compromising the safety of my own family I will do so.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Glamdring:
Is defending your family different than self defense. I don't mean legally.
YMMV[/quote]

To my mind, if you have an assault rifle, and you fail to bring that weapon to bear in defense of innocent life when you could, you don't deserve your own life.

I believe Bible will instruct us:

"Whosoever shall save his own life easily, shall lose it."

The life spoken of here is Life Eternal if I am not mistaken.

Amy



[This message has been edited by Amy (edited May 09, 2000).]
 
AMY- I talked to the Father at my church and asked him "Father Reed, what if Michelle had killed her attacker?

We all know what I said, but this is what the Father said "You may ensure the protection of your family, and still be a child of God"



------------------
"The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, becuse the whole body of the people are armed"
Noah Webster
 
I believe defending the family is quite different from self-defense (though i expect that the legal issues may find me in fault...)

I do not have any children, and i am a young whipper-snapper. If i were alone and confronted, i would be expected to and most likely will attempt to escape the situation at all cost; post haste. Legally, because of my age, build and sex I would be looking at a very difficult fight in court to defend my choice to use a weapon to defend myself. (Except that i will not evacuate my house, for any reason or person.)

Now, if i were in custody of children, or in the presence of some of my elders, i believe there would be a different set of rules to apply. For example, my parents and I go into Boston somewhat regularly to dine and enjoy the theatre, and i generally carry when going into the city. If we were confronted (in a situation where my situational awareness doesn't effectively avoid confrontation) i simply couldn't expect that my parents would be able to follow my lead in trying to escape.

Therefore, i would have to become more pro-active in the situation to fascilitate the escape of friendlies. Perhapse this means an early draw? Perhaps this means drawing attention (and hopefully not too often, fire?)

I suspect that Parents would be in a simmilar, or perhaps worse, situation. Imagine a child seatbelted into a stroller. Are you going to be able to run or find sufficient cover with the kid in the stroller while your SO distracts the assailent? Is it better to split up here? I don't think so, but I don't know a good answer.

Also, when you are home at night and someone breaks in, do you expect your SO to take the kids and evacuate the house, while you prepare to do battle? I think in this situation the best bet is to huddle the family in a 'safe room' if possible and simply sit tight. Leaving the house could open you up to unknown attackers waiting in ambush.

The more i consider my self-defense option, the more i find that the overiding factor which determins my actions in the end is the ability of all friendlies to escape. I believe that keeping all friendlies together is paramount. Therefore i opine that family defense is quite assuradly and necessarily different from self-defense.

~USP
 
We settled this awhile back. I fight (only as a delaying tactic or defense) and she runs, though she tries to attract attention, call help, and anything else she can do WITHOUT staying where she's vulnerable.

It's not a macho thing. I told her if she would learn to fight for herself we'd reevaluate the system based on who's better, but she hasn't so she's the runner. At my current weight she may actually be faster than me anyway. ;)
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by USP45:
I believe defending the family is quite different from self-defense

Now, if i were in custody of children, or in the presence of some of my elders, i believe there would be a different set of rules to apply.
~USP[/quote]

More pro active is part of what I am thinking. I haven't been to a "name school" yet but I have studied all that I can get my hands on and talked, a lot, to friends who have had advanced training. And it really seems to me like most of the focus is on personal defense.

I don't have kids of my own but I do have kids that are "family" to me. And more than once in awhile I am the lone adult with them.

If there is only one small kid I can pick them up or drag them with one hand to cover. Two or three small kids though and what do you do with one adult?

I suspect there might not be a good answer.
 
GD,

Heck yeah, it's different, for me. I am much more willing to take some risks with my own personal safety. OTOH, if I am in the company of someone I am tasked with protecting- whether child, SO, elderly family, "principal"- you name it- I will use lethal force with little compuction, if I feel a genuine lethal threat. (Example- I might delay WELL into "Tueller" distance if being approached with a knife, if by myself, or attempt to run. If with a child-Drop the weapon! BLAM, BLAM!) Think "mother bear" attitude.


Interesting question about division of tactics depending on weapon load. Realistically, I believe in any family environment, there is likely to be one member significantly more skilled than the other, so that may not be an issue. When I had a SO, that individual was me. (However, if there are any eligible young ladies in Atlanta that are skilled marksmen and martial artists, please contact me, and perhaps we can have a less weighted partnership! :D)

GD, I might suggest you carefully consider the "charge into ambush" strategy. If you believe you are likely to be more skilled than your assailant(s), you are giving up your physical advantage (although you may feel you are gaining a phsycological one).
 
Yup, it's different for me as well. My dear wife has little upper body strength, is not very fast at running, does not carry, and is not as good a shot as I am. Situations that I might just run away from if I was alone take an entirely different outlook if I am with my wife. She runs, I do whatever I can to protect her, up to and including giving my life. That's what I signed up for when I said "I do."

I'm sure that makes some feminists crazy. And I'm actually relatively liberal in my beliefs. But I also believe it is my duty to protect my wife.

Jared
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spectre:
GD,


Interesting question about division of tactics depending on weapon load. Realistically, I believe in any family environment, there is likely to be one member significantly more skilled than the other, so that may not be an issue. When I had a SO, that individual was me. (However, if there are any eligible young ladies in Atlanta that are skilled marksmen and martial artists, please contact me, and perhaps we can have a less weighted partnership! :D)

GD, I might suggest you carefully consider the "charge into ambush" strategy. If you believe you are likely to be more skilled than your assailant(s), you are giving up your physical advantage (although you may feel you are gaining a phsycological one). [/quote]

That is my response for a "near ambush". I don't think I have to worry about claymores, etc so I feel the quickest and safest way out of the "kill zone" is to assault thru it.

I know I can run faster forward, not to mention see where I am going, than I can go backward.

I was perhaps not clear. The intent would be to charge at them but if possible break thru their line [I don't think most single goblins would be a real problem] and then attack them from the rear. Hopefully from behind cover.

BTW I would consider a "near ambush" to be no farther than ~ 3 or 4 paces usually closer but outside of grapple range.

------------------
There can be only one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top