Some of the most heated debates we have in classes is in regard our doctrine about not getting involved on the behalf of unknown third parties. I figured I would expand upon this a little bit, and better explain our position on this.
First of all InSights, teaches people to defend themselves and the people they care about not just from physical confrontations, but also from the legal penalties involved with the of force. Not getting involved in someone else’s dispute protects the individual from all of the risk of physical injury, criminal charges, and civil damages. Beyond calling the police, this is our default position. Staying out of other people’s problems will not protect the individual from feelings of guilt because they felt that they could have done something to help, or improve the general safety and welfare of larger society.
Frequently there are a lot of unknowns in any third party situation. Can we be sure of who is the aggressor and who is the victim? Can we be sure that the “innocents” are in fact innocent? We are contemplating putting an awful lot at risk (our lives, our freedom, our financial resources and those of our families) for a situation that if we had more information we might not feel compelled to get involved in. If I am sitting in prison for a mistake that I made (with the best of intentions) on be half of a stranger then who is going to protect and take care of the people I care about?
While the default is to call the police and otherwise stay out of it, it is up to the individual to make their choices and decide how much risk they are willing to assume on the behalf of a person unknown to them. Having a wider range of capabilities (in terms of tactics, skill, and equipment) allows one to mitigate some of this risk. I would say that it would I need a pretty clear picture of events before I would consider using deadly force on behalf of someone unknown to me.
Recently on the email list, Jeff Mau wrote what I consider to be a very good explanation of the Universal Firearms Handling Rules, his post follows:
1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never point your gun at anything you are not willing to shoot or destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind and beyond.
These rules are principle based and are for all places, all times, everywhere. They are not merely range safety rules. Unlike the NRA safety rules and various other mutated forms of these rules. The verbiage InSights uses is specific.
Frequently, people shoot themselves at gun schools because they don’t apply the UFHR to their gun handling.
My skills are driven by my tactics and these safety rules. If a particular skill forces me to violate these rules then I avoid it. One hand manipulation of the gun is a common area that people violate these rules. Frequently, people shoot themselves at gun schools because they don’t apply the UFHR to their gun handling.
Contact distance shooting is another area where rule number 2 is commonly violated and again people shoot themselves. I have even heard it said that in a middle of a gun fight it is OK to shoot yourself because you have more important things to worry about. The skills InSights teaches are specific. Not only do we teach skills that are more efficient, but they are also safer. Frequently in training, I hear colleagues stated that the UFHR don’t apply in the real world. This is patently false and a fundamental misunderstanding of the UNIVERSAL Firearms Handling Rules. Some of these people are the same ones have shot themselves in various appendages! Some people don’t even learn their lesson the hard way.
Rule number 4 is simply to know your target, what is beyond it and being willing to accept the consequences of what you shoot. It most certainly does not mean you can only point your gun at a berm or something else that will stop a bullet. If given the distance, I will likely not immediately shoot the crazy guy making threats with a knife standing in front of a school bus with little kids inside. If possible, I will maneuver to avoid the possibility of hitting an innocent. However, if that same crazy guy has a bomb strapped to his chest, then I have no issue taking the shot and possibly jeopardizing the kids.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Subscribe via RSS
InSights Training Center
