Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Login or register to post comments Last Post 15887 reads   103 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 103 total)
  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 01:56am

    #1

    Rosemary Sims

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 02 2008

    Posts: 44

    count placeholder

    Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Ok, this is a bleeding capillary from a thread where guns came up once again as the primary way to protect oneself and ones family when shtf.  I am truly shocked that little has been said in this most erudite forum about other means of doing that other than shooting a gun at somebody.  So I think it is time to talk about the wily ways  human beings have of protecting themselves, their families and their properties in the midst of the possible chaos that confronts us today.

I can remember the first time I read that UK police do not carry guns.  I was shocked, really shocked because at that time I was a "baby snatcher" (read social worker who removes children because of severe abuse or neglect which may result in their deaths) and I always prayed before I went out on such a call for a cop (who never appeared) to accompany me and protect me and the child/ren in the darkest corners of New Orleans, often in the middle of the night. I wanted to hear the clink of that laden police belt beside me as I walked to the front door hearing the drunken shouts of parents and screams of children and babies and sometimes gun shots. ( Later that changed but not while I was doing it,)

Now, UK is a pretty civilized country, most would agree.  There may be just as much crime as any other country, but the fact remains that the cops in UK do not carry guns at any level of law enforcement, and protect themselves and others by non-gun means.  I do not know what those means are fully, but I bet there are people here who do, and I hope you post.

That being said, the very inefficiency and uselessness of using guns as a primary defense had been brought home to me earlier in life.  In the late 60’s  I happened to be the first white teacher introduced into a formerly all black high school in my native parish in LA as part of our racial integration efforts.   The State Police bought me a Hi Standard 22 derringer (beautiful gun!) which they in those days carried as a secondary in boot or whatever, took me to their range to practice using and maintaining the gun and told me in no uncertain terms that the purpose of the gun was solely to stop an attack.  They insisted that I use 22 shorts as opposed to long, hollow points, a most lethal thing.  But my head was filled with images of shooting it at students and I was resisting, so the chief of them took me for a drink and told me that it was not the blacks I had to fear but the KKK.  And all I had to do was stop them.  "You don’t want to kill them" he said.  "All you have to do is stop them from hurting you and your students."  I can remember asking him, in his tight beige uniform and lizard skin boots, if there were something else I could use to do that.  And of course there wasn’t at that time.  The Klan indeed rode over my being there, and actually burned a cross on my parents’ front lawn.  They also rode "backa town" and shot high caliber bullets through shotgun houses killing the relatives of, but not my students, where they ate their supper. I never had to use that gun for its intended purpose but have always, in spite of having at one time been a hunter, wondered what alternatives to "stopping an attack" have been developed since then.

I have heard of some – pepper spray, stun guns and here, I learned about flare guns (although they seem to have been removed from most internet sales sites).  

I’ll appreciate any and all thinking.

Rosemary

 

 

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 02:30am

    #2
    capesurvivor

    capesurvivor

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 12 2008

    Posts: 208

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Rosemary,

A scary-sounding setting; I would not want to have been there.You are a tough cookie.

An anecdote from my past. When I was a college student in Ohio in the 60’s, a college friend went Down South to help blacks register to vote. They were staying in a small cabin outside town when at night a pickup truck came by and starting spraying the cabin with bullets. My friend grabbed a rifle that the local (apparently non nonviolent blacks) had stored there and fired a few shots in the direction of the truck. It screeched away into the night. Disaster averted. The real role of a firearm is to stop someone, not kill someone, though one can never tell how far one has to go to prevent harm to the good guys.

I worked in counterterrorism (analysis, not operations)  for a while after getting my clinical psych doctorate. This was Texas so I became aware of the "gun culture" and got familiar with firearms. I don’t consider myself a "gun nut" but my own observations of distant and recent history, as well as my family’s experience in Europe during WWII, suggest to me that one always wants to have at hand contemporary weapons as a last resort. Even if you don’t make it, you won’t die a sheep. It is a truism that those with the guns make the rules.

Your question has both moral and practical  implications. The moral ones you will have to ponder on your own or with friends. The practical ones depend upon whether you are asking about  short-range defense or further out. Truthfully,I would doubt that a non-firearm would be very helpful in a real SHTF scenario. Reports from Argentina in 2002 suggest that even an armed populace had a tough time with anarchy.

I would be happy to dialogue here and I know there are other folks with stronger background than I in this area who will undoubtedly noitce your thread.

GLTA.

 

SG

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 03:17am

    #3
    MarkM

    MarkM

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 22 2008

    Posts: 347

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Rosemary,  out of curiosity, what is your stated fear or dislike of using defensive firearms.

You said, "…the very inefficiency and uselessness of using guns as a primary defense had been brought home to me earlier in life."  The story you relate sounds like a drive-by shooting and one that there was likely no defense for.  I hope you can picture situations where the only defense would be a firearm.

That being said, any self defense method depends on the situation.  It might be pepper spray, stun gun, martial arts, asp, knife, etc.  Different tools for different jobs.  The situation should be assessed and the appropriate defensive force applied.  ANY method (tool) requires plenty of practice to be effective. No matter how much I work with my wife, I guarantee she would likely not be able to dig her pepper spray (the only "tool" she is interested in) out of her purse.  One issue for females is that, in close quarter situations, your superior skill with a particular tool might be overcome by your attacker’s greater strength. 

I live in a suburb and feel that a person here should always be in "condition yellow" regarding their surroundings.  Your area may be different.

http://www.keepshooting.com/militarysurplus/collectibles/flare_gun_german.htm

http://www.defensedevices.com/aspbaton16inch.html

http://www.defenseproducts101.com/tasers_introduction.html?gclid=CPnTs76xv5gCFQIwxwodZ0udbQ

 

 

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 04:50am

    #4

    stpaulmercantile

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 20 2008

    Posts: 13

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

 

Rosemary,

Banning guns does not reduce violence, it increases violence.  London banned guns in 1997 and the incidence of violent crimes went up.  Gun crimes, in particular, went up dramatically.  The obvious reason is that when you ban guns, only law-abiding people give them up.  So then only the bad guys have the guns, and they take advantage of that fact.

A good measure of this is the statistics on burglaries in various countries.  In the US, only 13% of burglaries occur when someone is at home (this is called a "hot burglary").  In England, the rate of hot burglaries has increased to 45% and has even become a "sport" for some burglars, who think it is fun to slap the family around, rape the women, etc.  This is what happens when burglars know that their prey will be unarmed.  In the US, more than half of the homes are armed, and the result is that burglars target homes that are empty.

Guns, in the hands of good people, are a good thing.  Concealed weapons, carried by trained and licensed citizens, are a good thing.  If you were going to rob a bank during the day and there were 20 people in the lobby, and you knew that on average, 10% of the population carried concealed weapons, you’d think twice about robbing the bank.  You’d be more bold if you were 99% sure that nobody had a gun.  To my knowledge, the number of murders committed by licensed gun owners in the USA (people with concealed carry permits) is zero.  That statistic is about 10 years old, but the point is that the number is extremely low. 

I plan to stay armed and ready.  I have no desire to shoot anyone and I have never had to even brandish a gun to get someone to run away.  And if a neighbor comes to my home, hungry, I’ll feed them a bowl of soup.  But if someone breaks into my home and threatens my family, I have a glock .45ACP in my gun safe, ready to shoot, that i can open in 3 seconds. 

Your point was to consider non-lethal weapons.  I also have a taser that I sometimes carry with me on my belt.  Most altercations do not require deadly force.  But when TSHTF, the liklihood of running into a situation where deadly force will be required will increase a thousand-fold. 

Chris recommends forming community alliances – before TSHTF – so you know who your neighbors are and you’ve formed bonds and relationships so you can help each other out.  This is better protection than a gun, because if you’re all in it together, you’ll watch each other’s backs. 

Bottom line – carry your taser, keep the gun locked and loaded.

 

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 05:54am

    #5

    Aaron M

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 22 2008

    Posts: 790

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Rosemary,

You said:
[quote]  I am truly shocked that little has been said in this most erudite forum about other means of doing that other than shooting a gun at somebody.  [/quote]

I don’t mean to sound rude, but maybe you should consider why that is generally regarded as the most practical and efficient method of defending ones’ home, family and livelihood by intelligent members of an intelligent forum.

There are many other points to address in your original post, but in the interest of staying "on topic", here some of my opinions;

We cannot view defense in a "collapsed" USA as we do in a "civil" USA;

In a Post-Collapse world, we may be faced with multiple, armed assailants, where as in civil America, most violent crimes occur between an aggressor and victim (outside of Gang-Related violence).
Police will not be a "service", and will not largely be available.

When we start discussing "non-lethal" methods of self defense, we’ve officially changed topics from "defense" to "subjegation", and it should be recognized that these two types of tools are catagorically different and designed with different intentions.

Non-Lethal weapons are made to subdue an assailant or suspect who is violent for incarceration.
The effects are not long lasting, and the weapons are not designed to be "rapidly reusable". Nor are they intended to be used outside conversational distances. Most "present" altercations take place at close range, and "Post Collaspse" – It’s my belief that they will still occur at close range (0-21′) in most cases.

Because of this, weapons designed to "deter" attackers that may (or may not, and often do not) have an effect on a single attacker will not have an effect on a "group" of foes, whereas lethal force may be necessary and warranted.
Firearms are easily recognizable, and more often than not serve as a deterrant upon presentation.

Furthermore, if you do decide to use Non-Lethal Force, you need to be ready to detain and imprison the offending party if there is no police response which was common place in Argentina after their collapse – this means feeding, maintaining, securing and mitigating further threats from that person. The option is that, or abandon them and run.

Is anyone here ready to take on that responsibility after a collapse?
How about a gang? How can a self-sufficient community deter a gang with less than lethal means?
How can it be morally justified, consider that gang will find others to victimize?

Mind anyone reading – I’m not saying shooting people should be a "first" and "final" solution.
I’m not advocating "shooting first and letting God sort ’em out", or any of that nonsense.
I’m not encouraging anyone to "stockpile" weapons and ammunition. Buy enough to last, but get out and train!
I am advocating comprehension of the possibility that the next twenty years might be completely unlike the last 20 years – and crime will change as society changes.

Lastly, we can’t, and shouldn’t view any weapon as a "magic bullet".
This is a matter of skill and mindset more than "owning weapons".

If you can defend yourself with physical strength, that is an option, but in my opinion, Less than Lethal methods; Tasers and Stun Guns are poor choices unless you’re dealing with local beligerants.

ASP Batons are a good choice, but without training, the line between "Less than" and "Lethal" blurs quickly.

Cheers!
Aaron

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 05:57am

    #6

    mainecooncat

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 08 2008

    Posts: 155

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Ha!

When I saw the title of this forum a few minutes ago I said Aaron must be busy on that one.

Speak of the devil…Laughing

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 06:16am

    #7

    Aaron M

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 22 2008

    Posts: 790

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

Haha!

I guess I’m easy to lure.
In all seriousness, I view it more of a matter of safety than advocacy. It’s just one of the few topics I feel I can speak on with a measure of authority. We can talk weather if you prefer =)

Cheers!

Aaron

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 06:27am

    #8

    Dogs_In_A_Pile

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 04 2009

    Posts: 810

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

[quote=capesurvivor]

They were staying in a small cabin outside town when at night a pickup truck came by and starting spraying the cabin with bullets. My friend grabbed a rifle that the local (apparently non nonviolent blacks) had stored there and fired a few shots in the direction of the truck. It screeched away into the night. Disaster averted. The real role of a firearm is to stop someone, not kill someone, though one can never tell how far one has to go to prevent harm to the good guys.

[/quote]

SG – I couldn’t disagree more.  When I point a firearm at someone it is because in my estimation the situation has deteriorated to the point where I feel that my life or the lives of my family members is/are threatened.  And should that situation ever occur, I will pull the trigger and put 2-3 rounds center of mass.  If you are still moving, I can only conclude that you are wearing body armor and the next two rounds are going into your head.

If the scenario you discuss above had played out in Virginia, your friend would have been arrested for brandishing a firearm and unsafe discharge of a firearm.

The role of a firearm is to take the life of someone who is threatening your or your family.  Not to threaten and not to deter – because deterrence without the accompanying will to employ force is hollow and all you are truly relying on is hope and good luck that you never get caught in that situation.

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 07:26am

    #9

    Amanda V

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 31 2008

    Posts: 80

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

My view:

Most people are far too "nice".  They are so genuinely "lovely" that they cannot comprehend how horrific other people can get.  And with it they just can’t get just how awful anybody could be when they are crazed through starvation and fear.

It is not just the bad guys and criminals.  Joe Blogs who is watching his kids starve, will be an angry and scary man to come across if he thinks you can help alleviate that.

I sincerely hope I am wrong.  I know I am going to get slammed by subsequent posters.  But I just want to take the chance to get everyone to maybe think about IF TSHTF badly – just how desparate "normal" people could be. 

I am not a "religous" person.  But I try to take on the principles.  Right now, I am guessing Jesus would be writing a post here saying  "do not have guns and share your food with any of your brothers that come knocking – the food you have is not yours, it is everyones to share"

You can’t feed a whole city so guess what, you all die.  But that is what I think he would say.  I am going to get totally shot down in flames here, but there you go ! 

To those of you who do not have guns and no other truely effective protection, but are still aware how bad it can get, I think you are truely enlightened saints and I take my hat off to you. 

  • Tue, Feb 03, 2009 - 07:54am

    #10
    Denny Johnson

    Denny Johnson

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 14 2008

    Posts: 119

    count placeholder

    Re: Alternatives to a Gun Arsenal in Post Peak America

[quote=Dogs_In_A_Pile]

The role of a firearm is to take the life of someone who is threatening your or your family.  Not to threaten and not to deter – because deterrence without the accompanying will to employ force is hollow and all you are truly relying on is hope and good luck that you never get caught in that situation.

[/quote]

The first role of a firearm can be to threaten and deter……..that does not preclude the will to employ force if deemed necessary.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 103 total)

Login or Register to post comments