TexasCHLforum.com

DEB wrote:

Excaliber wrote:
I'm at a loss to understand how experience in successfully managing the many challenges of multiple life threatening criminal encounters over time would put one at a judgment or performance disadvantage when compared to someone who has never done so at all.

That's a lot like saying we'd be better off with a president who has never run a business or served anywhere as an executive with profit and loss responsibility for anything.

How well that works out is on full display for all to see.

Perhaps I didn't cover it succintly enough, not the first time. As former L.E./Military often one will revert to previous training by getting involved in situations that one shouldn't or by immediatly going after the bad guy without processing one's current age or etc. I read where individuals complain about one person's actions and then give former L.E. a by, when they do pretty much the same thing. I mentioned on a previous post how one of my friends, former L.E., lit out after a bad guy, while unarmed, when said bad guy stole a women' s purse at a funeral home. When L.E. arrived much of their time was spent questioning him as they felt he could have been the bad guy. Another former Border Patrol Officer ran down the street during a drive by, while armed, and was himself arrested when current L.E. arrived. I have also seen where current/former military have involved themselves in situations where they could be considered the aggressor...We all get old whether we like it or not, move on to other occupations and etc. When one says former others often say ex-. Not knocking anyone, just trying to explain my thought process, however difficult that becomes, especially for me. I was also trying to convey that training, previous experiences degrade over time, without one continuing to be exposed to the stressors one had in a previous life. As far as a President's experience goes, that would have to be in another thread. I haven't been to overly impressed with many of those in my life time, especially our current. But, I am sure there are those that could persuasively argue that as well.

I hear what you're saying, and certainly there are former LE/military folks who have taken action that didn't turn out well. There are no guarantees on how things will turn out in every case, and in every line of work there are folks who are better at it than others.

It's also an apples and oranges thing to talk about LEO's and military folks as close to the same in this area. While both may have seen combat under brutal circumstances, the rules of engagement are radically different in the two environments. LEO experience is much closer to what citizens will encounter on domestic soil.

I can't speak to your experiences, but I can speak to mine. All the current and former LEO's I know have a much more sophisticated set of criteria that must be met before action is taken, and they have an excellent understanding of the risks involved. You can see their thought processes and judgments on display frequently in this forum. They have seen the issues firsthand, have used virtually all the available alternatives under different circumstances in the past, and are pretty darn good about recognizing and applying the one that's most likely to produce the most desirable result.

My point is that starting with a blank slate with no prior errors and no prior successes is no advantage at all. What you don't think of can kill you, send you to prison, or ruin you financially, and there aren't any do overs in this game.

There are a lot of hard lessons to be learned before one reaches level of judgment that will be consistently successful in incident after incident is developed. Many of them come from mistakes made in the "blank slate" days. Everyone I know in the LE community can relate dozens of such incidents. They work real hard to learn from the mistakes of others and not to make the same mistakes twice, because so many new and creative ones are available.

...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

Speedsix is just having a bit of fun with both of us. Speaking for myself, I don't mind a little levity and he's welcome to have a little fun at my expense. The ability to participate in this as the poker or pokee without meanness or offense is another part of the LEO experience that is sadly no longer common outside of the emergency services / military community.

I don't see a suggestion that only LEO's should be allowed to carry anywhere in this thread and I think that viewpoint would be hard to find even in the archives of this forum. Self defense is an inalienable right for everyone, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find members here who would disagree.

You're right that most folks who go through the trouble of getting a CHL and actually carrying on a daily basis usually have some incident or concern they could point to as the motivation for all that effort. Just as getting your driver's license made you legal but not as immediately able to handle emergency driving situations as you are now, getting a CHL doesn't make one fully prepared to successfully manage all types of violent encounters, which come in many flavors.

Some people do manage to get through bad situations they didn't train for through courage, determination, and a good dose of luck. Others who were similarly unprepared didn't fare nearly as well. During a life threatening incident, thinking skills are severely diminished and it's extremely difficult to come up with creative solutions under fire.

Training and experience tilt the odds in one's favor and keep a repertoire of preplanned and well thought out good decisions on tap so they're readily available when needed. This doesn't mean that someone with lots of training and experience will always be successful, or that someone with little training or experience will always be unsuccessful. It simply influences the likelihood of a good or bad outcome, based on what's happened to others in the past.

Excaliber wrote:

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

Speedsix is just having a bit of fun with both of us. Speaking for myself, I don't mind a little levity and he's welcome to have a little fun at my expense. The ability to participate in this as the poker or pokee without meanness or offense is another part of the LEO experience that is sadly no longer common outside of the emergency services / military community.

I don't see a suggestion that only LEO's should be allowed to carry anywhere in this thread and I think that viewpoint would be hard to find even in the archives of this forum. Self defense is an inalienable right for everyone, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find members here who would disagree.

You're right that most folks who go through the trouble of getting a CHL and actually carrying on a daily basis usually have some incident or concern they could point to as the motivation for all that effort. Just as getting your driver's license made you legal but not as immediately able to handle emergency driving situations as you are now, getting a CHL doesn't make one fully prepared to successfully manage all types of violent encounters, which come in many flavors.

Some people do manage to get through bad situations they didn't train for through courage, determination, and a good dose of luck. Others who were similarly unprepared didn't fare nearly as well. During a life threatening incident, thinking skills are severely diminished and it's extremely difficult to come up with creative solutions under fire.

Training and experience tilt the odds in one's favor and keep a repertoire of preplanned and well thought out good decisions on tap so they're readily available when needed. This doesn't mean that someone with lots of training and experience will always be successful, or that someone with little training or experience will always be unsuccessful. It simply influences the likelihood of a good or bad outcome, based on what's happened to others in the past.

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

...big difference between sarcasm and the humor I poked at myself and Excaliber...wasn't even directed at you...your skin might get a bit thicker through the years...that'd be a good thing...nothing for you to get your back up over...

carlson1 wrote:... I actually felt myself pulling the trigger...

This is the part that amazes me.

I can feel that moment.

It is to your credit that you stopped.

More than one life was very close to changing that night.

I'm glad it ended well.

speedsix wrote:

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

...big difference between sarcasm and the humor I poked at myself and Excaliber...wasn't even directed at you...your skin might get a bit thicker through the years...that'd be a good thing...nothing for you to get your back up over...

I can't let this one pass, as my father used to say: Don't be telling me its raining while you are wetting on my leg. LOL...Perhaps I am thin skinned during my posts and need to thicken up as suggested, I treat this forum as a training/learning event, especially while I am involved in posting. I enjoy the use of this forum when I read prior experiences, starting to post on areas that I find not fully developed and all for free. Where can I draw upon other L.E. experiences, other Military experiences, along with those without formal training and their experiences. Put all of these into a bowl and come out, hopefully, better prepared. For this I do thank all of those who post their experiences and hopefully we can continue to evolve our thought processes. Now off to the range.

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:

DEB wrote:

speedsix wrote:...Excaliber, I think we been told old farellers oughta ACT like old farellers and leave the action to the young whippersnappers...kinda seems like it to me...speakin' for myself, the only reason you see me in this wheelchair with a blanket 'cross my knees is it's the only way I can conceal my M60...lemmeatum!!!

I don't believe I said that at all. As Excaliber stated he doesn't know my experience level, nor does he or you know my age. I do read how the anti-gun folks believe only L.E. should be allowed to carry as they are the only ones trained well enough to respond to a possible self-defense need. And when I read on this forum suggestions, that to me, further that same progressive anti-gun reasoning I attempted to respond as passively and intelligently as possible. Perhaps I failed in my response. I agree that prior experiences are important, but I also believe that individuals by the time they are old enough to carry, probably have experienced problems that now cause them to want to carry. I have trained and led individuals and I believe that often the required action depends on the individual's reaction to the threat, often even without having L.E. or any other external formal training. But as now the conversation has devolved to sarcasm, I will butt out and bow to your greater intellect...

...big difference between sarcasm and the humor I poked at myself and Excaliber...wasn't even directed at you...your skin might get a bit thicker through the years...that'd be a good thing...nothing for you to get your back up over...

I can't let this one pass, as my father used to say: Don't be telling me its raining while you are peeing on my leg. LOL...Perhaps I am thin skinned during my posts and need to thicken up as suggested, I treat this forum as a training/learning event, especially while I am involved in posting. I enjoy the use of this forum when I read prior experiences, starting to post on areas that I find not fully developed and all for free. Where can I draw upon other L.E. experiences, other Military experiences, along with those without formal training and their experiences. Put all of these into a bowl and come out, hopefully, better prepared. For this I do thank all of those who post their experiences and hopefully we can continue to evolve our thought processes. Now off to the range.

Your using this Forum exactly as it is intended to be used, and your active participation is most welcome.

Questions from different points of view bring out discussion and, eventually, answers we might never learn from the way we each look at things individually.

I learn something (usually several somethings) from this Forum every day.

texanron wrote:

speedsix wrote:I won't cower in my house and watch someone rip me off

You think someone who makes the personal decision to stay inside and call 911 instead of going outside to confront a thief is a coward?

They sure aren't a sheepdog, unless they have reason to believe that the ripoff is a decoy and the house and persons inside are the real target.

OldCurlyWolf wrote:

texanron wrote:

speedsix wrote:I won't cower in my house and watch someone rip me off

You think someone who makes the personal decision to stay inside and call 911 instead of going outside to confront a thief is a coward?

They sure aren't a sheepdog, unless they have reason to believe that the ripoff is a decoy and the house and persons inside are the real target.

I disagree.

OldCurlyWolf wrote:

texanron wrote:

speedsix wrote:I won't cower in my house and watch someone rip me off

You think someone who makes the personal decision to stay inside and call 911 instead of going outside to confront a thief is a coward?

They sure aren't a sheepdog, unless they have reason to believe that the ripoff is a decoy and the house and persons inside are the real target.

For a level headed sheepdog, there is no always valid answer to staying inside or going outside, although outside virtually always involves substantially elevated risk.

The best decisions are made with full consideration of the facts in the totality of individual circumstances one is confronted with.

New guy here thought i would add to this conversation a bit. I work in irving and had several dealings with law enforcement due to where I happen to work. Irving police are very professional in my dealings with them as well. I have noticed a lot of crime in the area few months back there was a double or triple homicide close to where i work. Irving police initiated a felony traffic stop right in fron of my job for a stabbing that happened at the light up beltline. So yea they are fast. I have only recently began to look into getting a chl due to all of the violence i have been seeing or hearing about in the area. Glad nobody had to be shot and you truck is relativly unscathed other than the ignition switch.

OldCannon wrote:Best darn anti-theft device you can get for your car: http://www.ravelco.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Have one, works great.

The BEST anti-theft device is a garage.

ninemm wrote:

OldCannon wrote:Best darn anti-theft device you can get for your car: http://www.ravelco.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Have one, works great.

The BEST anti-theft device is a garage.

Not until you put that pair of irritated Rottweilers in the garage with the vehicle.