Mindset

[Tactical Jackalope]

Not original from me, but I like the philosophy" Be polite to everyone you meet, but also have a plan to kill them."

Ssshh....Some things should just stay in the mind.


"I have learned silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet, strange, I am ungrateful to those teachers." - Khalil Gibran

 

[daddyo]

Really? Would most people see it that way?

The problem is, self defense stops when the threat dissipates. The cornered cat and the cornered rat do likewise. Most vicious animals do not.

Note that the cornered cat and the tomcat fighting for dominance are two different things.

The reason "cornered cat" is such a good choice is because everyone knows that a cornered cat becomes extremely violent. So I would think that most folks when asked would indeed see it that way. Same goes for the female lion defending her cub.

I, at least, am not hiding my true disposition.

And I am not predisposed to animalistic behavior yet I am judged by the words I write here. You have spoken about the benefit of avoiding certain words for fear of harm in court. This IMO suggests that you are indeed hiding your normal feelings. You are a trained deceiver. Can your testimony be believed?

It isn't at all a matter of using "defensive minded words". It is a simple matter three things:

Acting intelligently--avoiding trouble in the first place; and
should that fail, acting lawfully, and using force only when and to the extent that is necssary; and
avoiding saying, writing, posting, wearing, or carrying anything that is likely to give the impression of a predisposition to use deadly force.

If you are avoiding the use of certain provocative words then you must be substituting them with defensive minded words.

Well, yeah, but that may not mean much.

Larry Hickey claimed self defense, but the as pax has pointed out, the prosecution used his training slogans with great effect.

Again a far cry from "go animal" followed by "(Must be ready to become extremely violent without delay or hesitation)" in a defensive mindset thread.

I can think of no good reason in the world for using the phrase "go animal", unless one is striving for cuteness. If one is trying to emphasize the importance of acting decisively and effectively, those words should do quite nicely.

Of course, the instructor should hasted to add warnings about continuing to shoot when the threat has been stopped and shooting someone who had decided to depart.

My student don't get the seriousness using decisively and effective, that's my reality. I began using the female lion defending her cub and they got the level of violence that might be needed.

My course suggests that once justified a defender should apply as much force as possible until the threat is no longer a threat. Like a light switch the defender should be prepared to use as much force as possible when the switch is flipped on (imminent threat of DOGBI) and stop when the threat has ended (switch off).

Like Frank, I am not hiding my true disposition. Perhaps unlike him, I'm somewhat offended at the implication that I am hiding something or being less than honest. This is who I am, at core: a good person who wants nothing more (and nothing less!) than to live my life in peace and die in my sleep at a ridiculously old age, surrounded by people who love me and who have also lived long and peaceful lives.

The reason your words matter, and the reason that the way you frame your acts matters, is because your mindset prior to the act really matters! It is not some semantic game. It is a measure of who you are and what you believe.

The mindset you carry into the act has a strong effect on what you do during the most frightening and chaotic moments of your life. In the center of whirlwind chaos, you may not have time to reason anything through. You will act, or not act, based on who you are and how you think. The things you do in those circumstances flow out of the type of person you are. They flow out of the beliefs you carry with you all the time and out of the things you've considered before the activity. In a very real sense, those beliefs can make you or break you.

Physically, your beliefs can help you survive and prevail during the actual encounter. They determine whether you'll fight and for what reasons. They determine how much force you're willing to use and how soon. They determine what "winning" looks like for you: what your goal is, what you'll be satisfied with, where (or if) you'll stop.

The physical actions you take during your encounter lead directly into the legal justifiability of what you've done. If your goal, your definition of 'winning,' includes the death of the bad guy, you may not stop when the threat stops. You may survive the encounter only to fail the legal aftermath.

Even if erroneous beliefs do not trip you up during the physical encounter, they can easily ruin you in the aftermath. If you acted with any intent other than to save innocent life, you may not pass the mens rea test, because the intent behind your actions really does matter in court. Do you know the difference between murder and a lesser degree of homicide? -- It's the presence of malice, which is nothing more than the mindset someone carries into the situation with them. Mindset matters.

It's not just a words game. It flows clear down to what you believe and why you do the things you do.

I was offended that my words, go animal, would be used by you guys to in effect suggest that I have a predisposition toward violence. Nothing could be further from the truth with me as well. Still this line of thinking forced the question I posed. After all you are suggesting that I refrain from using certain words which I feel properly describe the mindset needed to survive a violent encounter. In essence you are teaching me and many others to be deceptive. If my go animal can be used against me, why then can't your deception be used against you?

Note Pax that I am not questioning your honesty. I am simply debating the issue and using this angle to raise some questions that seem hypocritical.

Extreme violence is not necessarily the same as "animalistic" violence.

Generally, self-defense requires that the defender reasonably, consciously acted due to circumstances under which a reasonable person, given the same circumstances and knowledge, would have acted in similar manner.

This means that talk of "going animal" is counter productive, since that implies the actions taken were not reasoned nor reasonable.

Deadly force (I would not use "extreme violence," personally), deliberately applied to the extent necessary to stop the threat, is not a problem for any of us.

Language that implies a lack of deliberate action, but rather a giving in to animal nature, is the problem.

Edit: The issue with "extreme violence" vs "deadly force" is that of the internationally accepted doctrine of "necessity and proportionality."

Can nobody else see just how crazy this is? I'm being told to be a cornered cat..........extremely violent animal..........but not to say go animal......which certainly could be a cornered cat. It sure seems that this issue, bred from the don't sound like a bad guy or killer line of thinking, has been taken to a micromanaged extreme.

 

[pax]

After all you are suggesting that I refrain from using certain words which I feel properly describe the mindset needed to survive a violent encounter.

Not quite. I'm telling you it's the wrong mindset. That was the point of my last post.

pax

 

[hogdogs]

What PAX said in post #111 should be read and re-read by many!!!

I been on this forum for quite awhile.... My start involved many back and forths in threads PAX (Kathy from here on out) was involved or included in...

Many to this day would refer to me as a chest thumping APE in my self defense approach...

Armed or unarmed be it armed with a gun, a knife or just my wits... my mental actions steer me to a head on instant and unexpected forward approach/assault on my threat... If i had a gun I might learn to rethink that to learn to duck and cover behind a trash can... But i do not carry a firearm day to day...

But part of my learning was that many if not most threats (predators) have never thought about the prospects of a bantam weight redneck coming at them with everything available fully intending to stop that threat like a .40 cal can...

I have no idea what to say to investigators, lawyers or jurors to explain my actions other than... "I have no idea... fight or flight and all and flight didn't take place..."...

How you are able to articulate your side can mean everything... the words you choose need planned out to fit YOU... not the situation... that will already bear out in investigation...

Brent

 

[Frank Ettin]

...And I am not predisposed to animalistic behavior yet I am judged by the words I write here...

Yes, of course you're judged by the words you write. We have no other point of contact with you. We only know you by what you write. And as noted multiple times above, we are all judged by others based on the words we use and the other ways in which we present ourselves to the world.

And how do we know that you're not predisposed to bestial behavior. On one hand, you tell us you're not, but on the other hand you write things that seem to promote such behavior.

 

[daddyo]

Not quite. I'm telling you it's the wrong mindset. That was the point of my last post.

It is the same mindset. When you tell an otherwise peaceful law abiding civilian to become a cornered cat in essence you are telling them to become a violent less than human animal. The same thing I suggested. The hang up is the nitpicking over the fact that the cornered cat will stop when the danger is over and the perception that the civilian gone animal won't.

I clearly posted the return to normalcy once the threat has ended. Should my post be used against me anyone with half a brain would clearly see that it was nothing more than a temporary mindset used to help survive a violent attack. A very common mindset of being willing to get as nasty as a cornered cat.

1. Situational Awareness (because we cannot allow a bad guy to get the drop on us)

2. Tactically Sound (because we need to deploy the life saving tactics as we prepare to fight off the threat)

3. Get R Done (much have the skills to put bullets on target as fast as possible and in a vast variety of positions)

4. Go Animal (Must be ready to become extremely violent without delay or hesitation)

5. Keep Your Head (must be able to return to normal once the threat is over)

This is what is so aggravating. Kept in context what I said parallels what you suggest only I need an extra line to describe it and your cornered cat is more self contained to those who understand the feline and are able to think critically. I prefer to spell it out in plain English. Get nasty at the onset and then get back to normal asap.

You guys compare it to someone using excessive force or suggest that my "go animal" somehow would make a juror confused on whether I used to much force even though I clearly list "keep your head" next to describe the necessity to returning to normal demeanor once the threat is over. Again clearly a temporarily necessary state of mind to help fight off a violent deadly threat.

 

[daddyo]

Yes, of course you're judged by the words you write. We have no other point of contact with you. We only know you by what you write. And as noted multiple times above, we are all judged by others based on the words we use and the other ways in which we present ourselves to the world.

And how do we know that you're not predisposed to bestial behavior. On one hand, you tell us you're not, but on the other hand you write things that seem to promote such behavior.

Likewise you on one hand desire to be believed but on the other hand write things down on how to be deceptive. If I were a prosecutor tasked with your prosecution, I would indeed use these lessons as ammunition to show your trained deceptive mindset.

It can't go one way.

BTW I write to go animal and then keep your head and come back to normal. That is exactly the same thing a cornered cat, your approved description, does. That's how silly this debate has become.

Again please note that I am not suggesting that you or pax or anyone are liars. I'm simply using it for debate purposes.

I believe that the issue of not saying certain words/phrases which indicate a non defensive mindset like shoot to kill, I'll blow your brains out, be prepare to kill everyone you meet, and others, is certainly wise. I also believe that its being taken to the extreme here.

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by daddyo: The reason "cornered cat" is such a good choice is because everyone knows that a cornered cat becomes extremely violent.

Well, that's part of it.

So I would think that most folks when asked would indeed see it that way.

What most people understand is that if they try to pick up a frigthend kitten who has nowhere to go they will end up with a scratch or a bite, and that a dog who molests a cornered cat risks injury, and that that's as far as it will go. Dogs learn that quickly, too.

Same goes for the female lion defending her cub.

I don't know enough about that to comment.

And I am not predisposed to animalistic behavior yet I am judged by the words I write here.

What is more important is that your students may be seriously harmed by what you have told them.

You have spoken about the benefit of avoiding certain words for fear of harm in court. This IMO suggests that you are indeed hiding your normal feelings. You are a trained deceiver.

You have absolutely no basis for that comment.

Can your testimony be believed?

The open question is will it be believed.

If you are avoiding the use of certain provocative words then you must be substituting them with defensive minded words.

I do not understand what you are trying to say.

My course suggests that once justified a defender should apply as much force as possible until the threat is no longer a threat. Like a light switch the defender should be prepared to use as much force as possible when the switch is flipped on (imminent threat of DOGBI) and stop when the threat has ended (switch off).

That may be your intent, but others may well decide that your use of the phrase "go animal" means something else.

I was offended that my words, go animal, would be used by you guys to in effect suggest that I have a predisposition toward violence. Nothing could be further from the truth with me as well.

It is completely irrelevant what the words suggest about you. What counts is how they may be used against one of your students in a trial involving a defense of justification.

After all you are suggesting that I refrain from using certain words which I feel properly describe the mindset needed to survive a violent encounter.

Yes, because there is also the little matter of surviving the aftermath.

In essence you are teaching me and many others to be deceptive.

Not unless your true mindset is one that would get you into trouble.

If my go animal can be used against me, why then can't your deception be used against you?

What deception, pray?

I'm being told to be a cornered cat..........extremely violent animal..........but not to say go animal......which certainly could be a cornered cat

You are indeed.

It sure seems that this issue, bred from the don't sound like a bad guy or killer line of thinking, has been taken to a micromanaged extreme.

Imagine--just imagine--a prosecutor repeating the words "go animal" over and over.

It is the same mindset. When you tell an otherwise peaceful law abiding civilian to become a cornered cat in essence you are telling them to become a violent less than human animal. The same thing I suggested. The hang up is the nitpicking over the fact that the cornered cat will stop when the danger is over and the perception that the civilian gone animal won't.

That "nitpicking" pertains to one of the most important factors in the justification of the use of force, deadly or non-deadly.

I clearly posted the return to normalcy once the threat has ended. Should my post be used against me anyone with half a brain would clearly see that it was nothing more than a temporary mindset used to help survive a violent attack.

Are you suggesting that a prosecutor would explain all of that?

Do you believe that one who has "gone animal" would be expected by the triers of fact to have had the mental and emotional capacity to make the change instantly?

You guys compare it to someone using excessive force or suggest that my "go animal" somehow would make a juror confused on whether I used to much force even though I clearly list "keep your head" next to describe the necessity to returning to normal demeanor once the threat is over.

After the damage has been done...

Again clearly a temporarily necessary state of mind to help fight off a violent deadly threat.

What is a 'temporarily necessary state of mind"?

Likewise you on one hand desire to be believed but on the other hand write things down on how to be deceptive.

What?

If I were a prosecutor tasked with your prosecution, I would indeed use these lessons as ammunition to show your trained deceptive mindset.

You would fail.

BTW I write to go animal and then keep your head and come back to normal. That is exactly the same thing a cornered cat, your approved description, does. That's how silly this debate has become.

Unfortunately, many people--most, I think--would not see it that way.

If anyone I know ever tells me that he or she has been advised to "go animal" in a self defense training course, I will tell them to walk away immediately and to not return.

 

[K_Mac]

BTW I write to go animal and then keep your head and come back to normal. That is exactly the same thing a cornered cat, your approved description, does. That's how silly this debate has become.

I completely agree that continued support of the idea that one can, or should, turn off higher order thinking skills when faced with a situation where lives hang in the balance is as silly as it gets.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Actually, if you read the training literature in emergency and critical incidents, the useful responses are those that are practiced repeatedly in simulations. Thus, they are reasoned responses that move from conscious competence to unconscious competence - the concept of automaticity.

Thus, in a fire, dogfight, gun fight -well trained people don't go 'animal' which implies an unreasoned rage. They respond quickly with a perceptual and cognitive action paradigm that they trained into. We hear the mantra - you will resort to your training. Experts mention how in a gun fight their training guided them through.

In cases with unreasoned use of force - for example, sympathetic or contagious shooting of an innocent - that might be described as 'going animal'. Extreme violence was not well thought out.

Can we finally agree that this was an ill chose phrase - for many reasons?

 

[pax]

This came from a lecture that I gave last weekend.

"'If you have to fight, fight like a cornered cat.' That is my tagline. A lot of people seem to think that this means something like, 'if you have to fight, fight really, really hard.' That is not what it means at all!

"Here is the heart of the matter. To fight like a cornered cat is to fight with a specific goal in mind. A domestic cat is not interested in fighting with whatever has frightened her. She is not "punishing" her attacker. She is simply getting to safety. As soon as she escapes, she stops fighting. She does not deal in revenge. She avoids trouble whenever she can. If there is trouble brewing somewhere, she disappears. She does not stick around to see what is about to happen. If she is attacked, she simply leaves – efficiently.

"A domestic cat does not live for the fight, either. She does keep her claws sharp, and she does know how to protect herself, but sharpening her claws is not all there is to her life. She is far more interested in living a safe, comfortable life than she is in any of that warrior stuff. She will avoid danger when she can.

"If you have to fight, fight like a cornered cat. Fight with the specific goal of getting to safety. Stop instantly when you know you have reached your goal. Don't deal in revenge. Don't stick around to see what is about to happen if you think trouble is coming. If you are attacked – leave!"

This is a very far cry from telling people to "go animal." It is simply a word picture that I use to illustrate the mindset of someone who avoids trouble, seeks to get away from danger, and fights only for defense – never for offense.

pax

 

[Frank Ettin]

....Thus, in a fire, dogfight, gun fight -well trained people don't go 'animal' which implies an unreasoned rage. They respond quickly with a perceptual and cognitive action paradigm that they trained into. We hear the mantra - you will resort to your training. Experts mention how in a gun fight their training guided them through.

In cases with unreasoned use of force - for example, sympathetic or contagious shooting of an innocent - that might be described as 'going animal'. Extreme violence was not well thought out...

And that is exactly the first point. That is why "going animal" is both the wrong mindset and the wrong implication.

..."If you have to fight, fight like a cornered cat. Fight with the specific goal of getting to safety. Stop instantly when you know you have reached your goal. Don't deal in revenge. Don't stick around to see what is about to happen if you think trouble is coming. If you are attacked – leave!"...

And that is exactly why "fighting like a cornered cat" is not the same a going "animal."

...The reason your words matter, and the reason that the way you frame your acts matters, is because your mindset prior to the act really matters! It is not some semantic game. It is a measure of who you are and what you believe....

And that is the foundation of why the words matter.

The words you use help define and form your mindset. The words we use not only influence how others perceive us. We also internalize those words and they thus influence our mindset. And thus there is no deception.

 

[pax]

Incidentally, daddyo, we do have far more in common than we are divided by. Like you, I am enjoying the discussion and am enjoying the opportunity to explore the mindset concept more thoroughly and more critically.

The problem is that we are walking along a very sharp ridgeline at the top of a mountain. There are steep cliffs and sharp rocks on both sides of the ridgeline. To take one foot off the trail in either direction will result in tragedy. On one side of the trail, you can fall to your death at the bottom of the cliffs by not responding soon enough, or effectively enough, to a violent attack. You can fall to your death on the other side of the trail and land on the sharp rocks of the legal system. Either way, falling off the trail is not ideal. So we have to stay on a fairly narrow mindset pathway.

I suspect that you believe I am likely to fall off the cliffs on one side of the trail. And I believe that many of the posters in this thread have been concerned that you will fall to your death on the other side of the trail. But we do have some common ground, and that common ground is worth exploring.

We agree that if you do have to fight for your life, you need to do so effectively and without finicky caution for your attacker's feelings or physical status."Do not worry about your condition; make the assailant worry about his condition," wrote Jeff Cooper many years ago. I think you and I can agree on that one.

Another aspect we have in common is that we both agree that you must stop fighting as soon as you have reached safety. Safety might be defined as physically removing yourself from the area. It might be defined as that the attacker has stopped trying to harm you – he has run away, he has surrendered and thrown down his weapon, or he is no longer able to attack you because he is unconscious or dead. Neither one of us intends to continue a fight after safety has been reached.

So we do have a lot in common. I am concerned with the phrase "go animal," because I think it fails to encapsulate some important mindset concepts. However, within the context of your larger list – and with extra explanations – I do not believe it is as problematic as the first responses you have seen in this thread. Unfortunately, I also believe that juries are made up of people who – like everyone else on the planet – may have limbic system, gut level, knee-jerk reactions to language.

Hope this makes sense.

pax

 

[daddyo]

What is more important is that your students may be seriously harmed by what you have told them.

Hogwash! My students have so far been able to understand that the purpose of going animal is to make them understand that they should be prepared to get as violent as necessary and then stop that elevated violence once the threat has been diminished. Which is expressly discussed in class. Just because you guys take this issue to the most extreme doesn't mean my students are at risk of anything.

You have absolutely no basis for that comment.

Wrong again! During the Zimmerman trial it was argued by the prosecution that Zimmerman was educated in what to say to police to make himself look innocent. My point is that you guys have done worst to include actually arguing why it is wise to decieve.

The fact that Zimmerman was found not guilty despite saying "they always get away" and following after it being suggested that he not and with the media making it look like he shot a child, all suggest to me that if the shooting is truely justified, you will be okay even in the most extreme cases.

The open question is will it be believed.

Is that more or less likely after your written lessons on how to deceive? Just as you suggest that it will be less likely that my appropriate use of force might not be believed due to the "go animal" title to my mindset, your active lessons on how to deceive could make you less believable.

I do not understand what you are trying to say.

You argue against the use of certain provocative words and suggest using words that describe the mindset in a last resort defensive minded way like the cornered cat.

It isn't at all a matter of using "defensive minded words". It is a simple matter three things:

Acting intelligently--avoiding trouble in the first place; and
should that fail, acting lawfully, and using force only when and to the extent that is necssary; and
avoiding saying, writing, posting, wearing, or carrying anything that is likely to give the impression of a predisposition to use deadly force.

In this quote you speak from both sides of your mouth.

That may be your intent, but others may well decide that your use of the phrase "go animal" means something else.

Kept in context with "keep your head" return to normal asap, I will be just fine.

Yes, because there is also the little matter of surviving the aftermath.

Gonna be tough for both of us then. Me for describing what a cornered cat means and you for teaching folks how to deceive. How to mask or cloak your true thoughts.

Not unless your true mindset is one that would get you into trouble.

The trial after the fact may have your triers looking for evidence of your truthfulness. Just like it was done to Zimm they could be presented with your posts proving that you consciously plot out what to say to make you look less aggressive. You could be otherwise totally justified yet because you are actively training folks to say the right thing, you mark yourself as a potential liar. Just as my training folks in being mentally prepared to become a cornered cat violent marks me as predisposed to violence to some of you.

What deception, pray?

The active instruction of what NOT to say so that you present a certain image.

You are indeed.

The obvious hypocricy completely ignored LOL.

Imagine--just imagine--a prosecutor repeating the words "go animal" over and over.

And you imaging being called a premeditaded deceiver over and over again.

That "nitpicking" pertains to one of the most important factors in the justification of the use of force, deadly or non-deadly.

Indeed it does. Still extreme nitpicking IMO.

Are you suggesting that a prosecutor would explain all of that?

Do you believe that one who has "gone animal" would be expected by the triers of fact to have had the mental and emotional capacity to make the change instantly?

No I expect my defense attorney to do that.

I expect the context to be reveiled and my triers to be able to see that I was following my training on how to survive a violent encounter. The natural next progression of which is to "keep you head" or return to normal ASAP. I expect my triers to take a look at my lifes history of non violence and law abiding behavior as well.

What is a 'temporarily necessary state of mind"?

Really?

Becoming a cornered cat also known to me as going animal as in going hot like a cornered cat as in losing your normal soft and nice demeanor.

You would fail.

So would you.

I agree with you BTW. Just as my scenario is rediculous and far fetched, so is yours.

Unfortunately, many people--most, I think--would not see it that way.

If anyone I know ever tells me that he or she has been advices to "go animal" in a self defense training course, I will tell them to walk away immediately and to not return.

Within your rights. My students are taught essentially the same thing. Avoid the buzz words, use deadly force as a last resort, I just feel that you guys are taking this to the extreme. You are so conditioned to avoid the preception of being labeled as the aggressor that you lash out at anything no matter how hypocritical or extreme.

You know good and well that when provided the whole picture of my quote, normal folks would see it as nothing more than the training tool that it is.

I could make your cornered cat look like pure evil if allowed to give you only one side.

He trained to become a cornered cat. A vicious crazed animal willing to do anything necessary to survive. Willing to use all the force available in an explosive violent burst. A cornered cat doesn't care how big you are, it doesn't care if you were bluffing, when it decides its time to act it gives everything it has when half of what it has would have sufficed.

Sure sir a cornered cat will stop when you are no longer a threat but how much extra force did it deploy before making that decision? With my description "go animal" I am essentially saying the same thing only I add the need to return to normal non violent activity as soon as the threat has ended. After all I'm not a cat. I'm not evil. I am being forced into violence and my training dictates to do what is necessary to survive then return to peace. Your cat will often use more force than was necessary. I have seen cats keep up the fight on a fleeing dog. I have seen two cats literally beating a dogs posterior. Part of a cats defense is to be explosive and to keep the juice going well after it could easily flee.

 

[daddyo]

I completely agree that continued support of the idea that one can, or should, turn off higher order thinking skills when faced with a situation where lives hang in the balance is as silly as it gets.

Did you read my discription of what go animal means? Must be ready to become extremely violent without hesitation. Hardly turning off higher order thinking skills. My description focuses on the need to be willing to fight hard and violently and without hesitation.

A cornered cat sounds like a higher order thinking beast to you though right?

 

[MLeake]

daddyo, it has been pointed out to you several times already, but "deception" implies we are hiding something, in this case - according to you - a predisposition toward use of deadly force.

That is demonstrably false, in some cases, as there are at least a few of us who have successfully de-escalated scenarios where use of deadly force would have otherwise been justified. Being willing to use force if absolutely necessary is hardly a predisposition toward use of force. Your claim falls apart once your false, underlying assumption is removed.

You are arguing with several lawyers and at least one nationally known instructor. If they all tell you that your terminology could cause problems for you or your students, you might want to give that some serious consideration.

You might also wish to rethink your "deception" accusations. All the mods you are arguing with have, on at least one and typically on multiple occasions, advised both TFL members and real world students to never lie to investigators.

In your last post you said you tell students to avoid buzz words. Why, then, do you insist on making a stand over "go animal"? What are those, if not buzz words?

 

[K_Mac]

A cornered cat sounds like a higher order thinking beast to you though right?

No. It does evoke the image of being put in a situation where fighting may be the only option. It does not give the impression of of a predisposition for violence for any reason other than self-preservation. It does illustrate that sometimes using deadly force is a reasonable choice. "Going animal" gives the impression of losing control, and is not the mindset we should have or teach in my opinion.

 

[OldMarksman]

Posted by daddyo: My students have so far been able to understand that the purpose of going animal is to make them understand that they should be prepared to get as violent as necessary and then stop that elevated violence once the threat has been diminished.

Great. Wonderful.

The problem is, the state has been given a basis for trying to prove otherwise.

My point is that you guys have done worst to include actually arguing why it is wise to decieve.

...your active lessons on how to deceive could make you less believable.

... and you for teaching folks how to deceive. How to mask or cloak your true thoughts.

Suggesting that advising people to refrain from creating evidence that could be used against them as indications of state of mind is in any way a means of deception--unless, of course, there is reason to believe that the purpose is in fact to conceal a criminal state of mind--is illogical and baseless.

Saying something like "don't say anything dumb" is just good advice.

Kept in context with "keep your head" return to normal asap, I will be just fine.

there are two aspects to that.

The first is that the prosecutor can repeat the first part only, without the second, over and over, while your attorney will have only limited opportunity to counter the argument in his or her closing remarks. And the prosecutor will speak last.

The other problem is that cited by Dr. Meyer:

...well trained people don't go 'animal' which implies an unreasoned rage. They respond quickly with a perceptual and cognitive action paradigm that they trained into. We hear the mantra - you will resort to your training. Experts mention how in a gun fight their training guided them through.

In cases with unreasoned use of force - for example, sympathetic or contagious shooting of an innocent - that might be described as 'going animal'.

I could make your cornered cat look like pure evil if allowed to give you only one side.

He trained to become a cornered cat. A vicious crazed animal willing to do anything necessary to survive. Willing to use all the force available in an explosive violent burst. A cornered cat doesn't care how big you are, it doesn't care if you were bluffing, when it decides its time to act it gives everything it has when half of what it has would have sufficed.

Sure sir a cornered cat will stop when you are no longer a threat but how much extra force did it deploy before making that decision?

The term "Cornered Cat" has been widely employed in self defense literature and training for a very long time.

With my description "go animal" I am essentially saying the same thing only I add the need to return to normal non violent activity as soon as the threat has ended. After all I'm not a cat. I'm not evil. I am being forced into violence and my training dictates to do what is necessary to survive then return to peace.

The problem is that what you intend to convey and how the general public will perceive it may well be two different things.

You have been advised of that here by several very highly regarded professionals on the subject.

A defendant trained under the constructs put forth by pax will have easy access to expert witnesses who will be able to counter any criticisms of the concept. Your students will only have, at best, the potential of bringing you in to explain what it was that you meant to convey.

Your cat will often use more force than was necessary. ... Part of a cats defense is to be explosive and to keep the juice going well after it could easily flee.

You are confusing the idea of a cat fighting for dominance or for territory with that of a cornered cat, well understood by most people and well described by pax in public literature. And her description is available for use in a trial if needed.

Did you read my discription of what go animal means? Must be ready to become extremely violent without hesitation. Hardly turning off higher order thinking skills. My description focuses on the need to be willing to fight hard and violently and without hesitation.

Yes, you have explained here what you intend for it to mean.

Dr. Meyer has offered a different point of view.

Dr. Glenn E. Meyer, PhD, is full professor in the Psychology Department at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas. He received his doctorate in 1975 and has written numerous professional articles and books in the areas of visual perception, cognition and statistics. ... A convert to the world of defensive firearms, he has been an NTI practitioner & has studied with several well known trainers.

Would you really want your students to be faced with the expert testimony of someone like that?

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Always be polite, and have a plan to kill every person you meet...pray you never need it, but get it done quick if you do.

 

[daddyo]

Incidentally, daddyo, we do have far more in common than we are divided by. Like you, I am enjoying the discussion and am enjoying the opportunity to explore the mindset concept more thoroughly and more critically.

The problem is that we are walking along a very sharp ridgeline at the top of a mountain. There are steep cliffs and sharp rocks on both sides of the ridgeline. To take one foot off the trail in either direction will result in tragedy. On one side of the trail, you can fall to your death at the bottom of the cliffs by not responding soon enough, or effectively enough, to a violent attack. You can fall to your death on the other side of the trail and land on the sharp rocks of the legal system. Either way, falling off the trail is not ideal. So we have to stay on a fairly narrow mindset pathway.

I suspect that you believe I am likely to fall off the cliffs on one side of the trail. And I believe that many of the posters in this thread have been concerned that you will fall to your death on the other side of the trail. But we do have some common ground, and that common ground is worth exploring.

We agree that if you do have to fight for your life, you need to do so effectively and without finicky caution for your attacker's feelings or physical status."Do not worry about your condition; make the assailant worry about his condition," wrote Jeff Cooper many years ago. I think you and I can agree on that one.

Another aspect we have in common is that we both agree that you must stop fighting as soon as you have reached safety. Safety might be defined as physically removing yourself from the area. It might be defined as that the attacker has stopped trying to harm you – he has run away, he has surrendered and thrown down his weapon, or he is no longer able to attack you because he is unconscious or dead. Neither one of us intends to continue a fight after safety has been reached.

So we do have a lot in common. I am concerned with the phrase "go animal," because I think it fails to encapsulate some important mindset concepts. However, within the context of your larger list – and with extra explanations – I do not believe it is as problematic as the first responses you have seen in this thread. Unfortunately, I also believe that juries are made up of people who – like everyone else on the planet – may have limbic system, gut level, knee-jerk reactions to language.

Hope this makes sense.

Totally understand and agree with all of it. Not a great choice of words but I defend it simply because my expressed meaning of going animal what listed. Words mean different things sometimes. My meaning was " (Must be ready to become extremely violent without delay or hesitation)". I feel as though I have a good grasp of the things that could come back to haunt me. Go Animal isn't high on that list.