Clicky

News

by -
16 6237

Sadly, on Friday November 27, 2015 — while much of America was enjoying the start of a Thanksgiving weekend — a crazy man decided to go on a killing spree in Colorado at a Planned Parenthood center.

After a 6 hour standoff, with three people dead and at least nine wounded, the accused killer finally surrendered to a SWAT team.

The next day, President Obama wasted no time politicizing the event and again spoke against so-called “gun violence”.

Let’s talk about why “Gun violence” is actually only a propaganda buzzword and why Mr. Obama is only using it to manipulate the population because he clearly doesn’t actually care about innocent victims of violent crimes.

“Gun Violence” Is a Made Up Propaganda Buzz Word

Attorney Robert Shapiro is a well known lawyer for the rich & famous. He put together the “dream team” that kept OJ Simpson out of jail and he is known for his creative application of English in the legal profession …

In 1990, he was called on by Marlon Brando to defend Brando’s son Christian who had admitted to shooting his sister’s fiance–a potential first degree murder charge.

Shapiro describes how he beat the case …

 “… So I coined the phrase “an accidental manslaughter.” And each and every time sombody asked me to comment on the case, I said “We will show clearly this was an accidental manslaughter.” And that’s what the newspapers printed. And to this day, when people talk about it, Christian Brando pled guilty to accidental manslaughter.

    “The phrase does not exist in law. It came out of my mouth and I repeated it hundreds of times over the course of three months. And it stuck. One-time use. One-time need.”

The phrase “accidental manslaughter” was never used before or since, but it served to change the conversation in the minds of the jury of that case.

It was literally propaganda that mentally associated the idea of “accidental” with the “manslaughter” charge in this case.

In the same way, President Obama and every anti-gun politician uses the words “gun violence” whenever talking about crazy murderers to get people to mentally associate the idea of “guns” with “violence” and horrible murders.

Then President Obama always makes the quick connection to wanting to ban semi-automatic, magazine fed rifles such as the AR-15 by calling them “weapons of war” and acting like they’re a real problem.

On Saturday he said, “… we have to do something about the easy accessibility of weapons of war on our streets to people who have no business wielding them. Period. Enough is enough.”

Let me quickly point out the hypocrisy of Mr. Obama claiming that he does not want so-called “weapons of war” on our streets because he certainly is OK with the police having these weapons on American streets as the meme below so eloquently points out:

obama-weapons-of-war-meme

Because I want to make the point incredibly clear I’m going to continue kicking the dead horse and point out that President Obama and every other anti-gun politician is hypocritical for only wanting firearms to protect themselves, but not everyday, regular Americans like you and I.

 

secret-service-cartoon

Let’s move on …

Actual Crimes Committed With Rifles (of any type) Are INCREDIBLY Low

Notice the use of the words “weapons of war” and even the commonly used description “assault rifle” are propaganda words anti-gun politicians use to demonize semi-automatic rifles like the AK-47 and AR-15 that are available to civilians like you and I.

The fact is, using the data from the FBI Uniform Crime Report, we find that rifles are used so little to commit murders that they are barely a blip on the statistical radar.

As you can see, murders using rifles of all types is so low you wonder why President Obama would make a statement about it at all …

FBI-Pie-2011

It’s important to note that the so-called “weapons of war” — the semi-auto AK-47’s and AR-15’s that Mr. Obama would like to ban — are only a subset of the “rifle” category of murders the FBI collects. This category would ALSO include hunting rifles and any other rifle ever used in murder.

Yet what do we find?

Once again, despite the President’s attempts to politicize every tragedy such as this … and despite a complacent media that jumps on these stories because “if it bleeds it leads” … not only are murders by rifles extremely rare, mass shootings using them are EXTREMELY rare.

Here’s a little bit of perspective for you:

mass-shooting-perspective

The truth is that murders by rifles are such a low, low number that if a person actually cared about stopping violence they would look somewhere else.

And mass shootings — the type that Obama loves to politicize by his own admission — are even more rare.

To put it all into perspective, the following infographic needs to be shared far and wide:

fbi-facts

In short, according to the 2011 FBI Uniform Crime Report, FIVE times as many people were murdered with knives in 2011 than with rifles of any type.

Three People Killed By Knife Over Thanksgiving Weekend 2015

Take a look at this headline from the Daily Mail, reporting the horrible murder-suicide of three people during the same Thanksgiving holiday weekend.

thanksgiving-stabbing

Yet, I can 100% guarantee that President Obama won’t issue a press release and demand tougher “knife violence” laws.

The White House will not tweet that this type of murderous activity is intolerable and that “enough is enough”.

Why?

Because Mr. Obama doesn’t actually care about innocent people being murdered. 

He only cares about his agenda, which is to ban firearms — specifically AR-15’s and AK-47’s and other semi-auto rifles (though I’m sure he would love to ban all firearms).

Obama’s Drone Strikes Have Most Likely Murdered More Innocent People–Including Children–Than The Colorado Springs Shooter 

Not to put too fine a point on it, but President Obama’s drone strikes have most likely murdered way more people in his time in office than the Colorado shooter.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism actually keeps tabs on the Drone Strikes and published this in January of 2015 (emphasis mine):

“At least 2,464 people have now been killed by US drone strikes outside the country’s declared war zones since President Barack Obama’s inauguration six years ago, the Bureau’s latest monthly report reveals.

“Of the total killed since Obama took his oath of office on January 20 2009, at least 314 have been civilians, while the number of confirmed strikes under his administration now stands at 456.

“Research by the Bureau also shows there have now been nearly nine times more strikes under Obama in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia than there were under his predecessor, George W Bush.

“And the covert Obama strikes, the first of which hit Pakistan just three days after his inauguration, have killed almost six times more people and twice as many civilians than those ordered in the Bush years, the data shows.”

Keep in mind — no matter how you feel about the effectiveness of these drone strikes in actually eliminating suspected terrorists — every time there is “collateral damage” in countries like this, it inspires more people in those countries to join the Jihad against the West.

(If someone blew up your grandmother, or your niece and nephew, you’d be pretty pissed too and be looking for a way to hit back. The CIA has labeled this common behavior “blowback”, but that’s outside the scope of this article.)

In Summary …

“Gun Violence” is a made-up word that President Obama and the media like to use because its propaganda that gets people focused on guns, not on actual violence …

Mr. Obama claims that “weapons of war” don’t belong on our streets, but he is clearly comfortable with those weapons of war being used to protect himself on these same streets just not for you to protect yourself or your family.

Additionally, the actual number of deaths by rifles — of any type, not just so-called “assualt rifles” (another propaganda word) — is so low it’s laughable that it’s a political issue at all.

In short, about FIVE times more people are murdered with knives than any type of rifle (based on FBI statistics for the year 2011).

Finally, if Mr. Obama was actually concerned about the victims of violence he would care about ALL murders, not just those extremely rare mass shooting events involving a semi-automatic rifle.

Additionally, I would assume the President would care about the hundreds of civilians he has murdered with the drone strikes he authorizes.

Instead, President Obama simply wants to politicize every shooting to push his agenda to disarm the American people.

 

by -
71 19069

After the terrorist attacks in Paris, there has been a major uproar over Obama’s plan to resettle more than 10,000 Syrian refugees in America …

It seems as if most people on the “right” think it’s absolutely bat-you-know-what-crazy because surely a large percentage of these 10,000 people will be terrorists in disguise …

And those on the “left” who support Obama, think that it’s a great plan because … well I guess because they support Obama.

I am not siding with Obama. I’m not siding with the Republicans.

Today, I want to step back from the argument, and try to wedge some desperately needed facts into the discussion and also look a little bit at the history of the United States, refugees, and just take a big picture view.

The Facts And Data Show That Since 9/11 Refugees Have NOT Been Terrorists …

Listen, I’m no fan of President Obama, but that doesn’t mean I am going to have a knee jerk, emotionally-driven reaction to disagree with everything he says.

That being said, when I heard that he wanted to let 10,000 more Syrian refugees into the U.S. — that idea sounded crazy.

After all, it seems logical that terrorists could infiltrate the U.S. by slipping in among the refugees—as a lot of people say that might have occurred in the case of one of the Paris attackers.

But the truth is, when it comes to issues like this, you have to use cold-blooded logic and look at the data to make a decision.

As DefenseOne.com reports:

“In the 14 years since September 11, 2001, the United States has resettled 784,000 refugees from around the world, according to data from the Center for Migration Studies, a D.C. think tank. And within that population, three people have been arrested for activities related to terrorism. None of them were close to executing an attack inside the U.S., and two of the men were caught trying to leave the country to join terrorist groups overseas.

“I think I can count on one hand the number of crimes of any significance that I’ve heard have been committed by refugees,” said Lavinia Limón, a veteran of refugee work since 1975 and the president of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. “It just hasn’t been an issue.”

Two Reasons Why Refugees Just Aren’t a Big Problem …

Why is this?

Wouldn’t it raise the risk of a terrorist getting in the midst if thousands of them start pouring in as refugees? Apparently, the truth is that there are quite a few screening measures in place.

Defenseone.com continues, that there are two reasons this isn’t as big a problem as you may think …

” … The first is that there is a key difference between people seeking placement in the U.S. as refugees and the millions of people who have flooded into Europe seeking asylum. The Syrians in Europe in many cases are already at or over the border, having come directly from Syria in to Turkey and then Greece and elsewhere; that situation is more akin to the thousands of Cubans who have fled by boat to South Florida or the migrant workers from Central America who gathered at the U.S.-Mexico border last summer. A refugee applying for resettlement in the U.S., by contrast, must endure a screening process that takes as long as two years before stepping foot on American soil.

And the second reason?

“… since the program was briefly halted and then overhauled after the 9/11 attacks, refugee applicants are subject to the highest level of securitychecks of any type of traveler to the U.S. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees initially chooses which refugees to refer to the U.S. after doing its own check. U.S. officials then conduct multiple in-person interviews and verify a refugee’s story with intelligence agencies and by running background checks through several government databases, including DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center. As a result of that extensive process, only around 2,000 Syrian refugees have been resettled in the U.S. since its civil war broke out in 2011—a much lower number than many previous refugee crises.

Immigration Is Always a Hot Button Issue

Many people don’t like the idea of immigrants. I don’t understand why because everyone in America was originally an immigrant.

It’s the whole idea of America … we’re supposed to be the freest nation in the world with a country built on the rule of law (not men) which means that everyone who wants freedom and wants to make something of themselves wants to come here.

The fact that we are in a presidential election race simply means that on both sides — the left and right — all the candidates are going to use immigration to try and divide their people and get them emotionally invested one way or the other.

Please remember, that the talking head politicians on TV do not give one care in the world about your safety, or the safety of United States — they simply want to get you emotional, fearful, and ready to accept their point of view.

In short, they’re manipulating you.

 So What’s The Solution?

The fact is, the Government keeps waging war, especially in the Mid East, so there really is not a solution here. Every bomb dropped and every shot fired helps create a refugee somewhere in those countries.

If you’re continually waging war in a country, you will have refugees — innocent people that just don’t want themselves and their families to be caught in the cross-fire — and they want to leave.

Many of them are flooding into other European countries because they can get there on foot. Some want to come here. The problem is not going away as long as their are wars in those countries.

The truth is, while the refugee program so far hasn’t seemed to be a problem, you never can be too sure.

Everyone that says you can’t be 100% sure that you’re not letting in a “terrorist in disguise” is completely right.

There’s no way to be sure …

But this is America. And the point is that politicians are simply using this refugee situation as a way to manipulate your emotions, plain and simple.

Again, I am not siding with Obama. I’m not siding with the republicans.

I’m siding with America’s founders, who understood how political power corrupts and how politicians will use every crisis to manipulate you. James Madison said:

 “In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.”

 – James Madison, Founding Father and 4th President of these United States

That’s James Madison warning you about the Government’s game plan.

Now here is Hermann Goering, famed Nazi leader, who was convicted of war crimes explaining how his Nazi party used the same plan to become so successful:

hermann-quote

My point is, stop being manipulated. 

Refugees have not appeared to be a risk in the past, and they “most likely” won’t be that big of a risk in the future.

Can we be sure? No, absolutely not … but … what’s the alternative?

The alternative is to continue killing, bombing, burning and otherwise waging war in those countries — such as Syria — and then turn your back on the innocent people caught in the cross-fire.

That’s not responsible. Those people–the innocent ones caught in the crossfire–simply had the bad luck of being born in Syria, instead of the good luck that myself, you and millions of others had to be born in America.

All I ask is that you do the research, look at the risks, and don’t get emotional because politicians don’t actually care–they just want to control you. 

Ultimately, YOUR Safety Is YOUR Responsibility

Finally, no matter what anyone thinks — the only thing you CAN be sure of — is that neither the Government, the Police, or anyone else can keep your safe.

NOTHING is 100%.

That’s why it’s so important for you to be ready to defend yourself and your family at any time. In short, don’t put your faith in politicians or their plans, put it in yourself and your preparation.

 P.S. Reason.com wrote a similar article to mine, and received many comments similar to mine — so I’ll repost their additional info here:

Note: Several commenters suggested Tamerlan and Dzhokar Tsarnaev, who committed the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013, were refugees. Strictly speaking, they were the children of asylees. As Bloomberg News explained the two were given “derivative asylum status” and didn’t come through the refugee admissions program. Apparently the legal distinction is too fine a point for some readers. So be it, but they should nevertheless keep in mind that the brothers were two people out of around 1.8 million people who were granted refugee or asylee status between 1995 and 2013.

by -
10 3860
Picture Credit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/

A string of coordinated terrorist attacks–including shooters, suicide bombers and reported hostage takers–ripped through Paris on November 13, 2015.

Early reports say that at least 129 people are dead and over 350 were injured …

In short, according to all reports, it has been one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in France for decades.

A video attributed to Islamic State was released on the following Monday warning that countries taking part in attacks against Syria would suffer the same fate as Paris.

We say to the states that take part in the crusader campaign that, by God, you will have a day, God willing, like France’s and by God, as we struck France in the center of its abode in Paris, then we swear that we will strike America at its center in Washington,” the man said.

So are more terrorist attacks on the way to America?

Most likely. Here’s why and what you can do to prepare …

Washington DC Was Specifically Named

The video attributed to ISIS/ISIL/Islamic State specifically mentioned that they would attack the center of America, Washington DC, much like they attacked the center of France (Paris).

I don’t think those are idle threats.

Washington DC is certainly seen as the seat of power of America and America is certainly seen as leading the war in the middle east.

A successful attack against America would strengthen the resolve of ISIS and it would serve an important function in their guerilla warfare strategy — to get the United States to further commit more resources in retaliation (ultimately weakening the U.S. further).

Does That Mean You Should Worry?

I think that if you live in a major city, Washington DC or New York come to mind, you should be worried.

For the majority of people, that don’t live in these places, I don’t think the risk has increased beyond what it always has been.

My main point is basically geographical …

One, we have two massive oceans that make it harder for war to spread to our soils (as opposed to France or any country in Europe).

And two, is the sheer size of the United States. For example, according to the TexasMonthly.com map below, “France is roughly the same size as Texas—but you can comfortably stuff Switzerland in alongside it like an accessory.”

texas-france

The point is that in order for a terrorist attack/guerilla force to make an impact in the United States they’d have to attack an important part of the U.S. Washington DC certainly fits, as well as NYC.

All of the above is why, with a population of over 300 million people, according to the Cato Institute, you being an American are about eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. Of course, that is purely meant to grab your attention, because cops are not the enemy, and you are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than a terrorist attack.

Perspective folks. That’s all I’m asking, so you don’t get worked into a frenzy by the media. You can’t think if you’re emotional and reacting out of fear.

What Can You Do?

Does this mean I don’t think you should prepare at all for the possibility of a terrorist attack near you?

Not at all. This blog is about being prepared after all …

I’ve said before that ISIS is in America, they said they’re in my state, and you should prepare now. Read that article to get some ideas of how to prepare.

In this article, I explain when running from an active shooter (applies to a terrorist as well) will get you killed. 

And I talked about how even if you’re unarmed when a terrorist attacks, you can still prevail using the tips in this article.

Finally, Greg Ellifritz is a respected firearms trainer that I’ve taken both a shooting class and a tactical medicine class from and he has an excellent article with links to his other articles on ways to prepare for terrorist attacks like the ones in France at this page here.

Of note, he covers both how to deal with the threats of bombs and suicide bombers and very basic medical advice everyone should know. Both these topics would have helped the people in France.

As for the specific attacks in Paris, the details are still not clear yet, so I won’t talk much about them, but it’s important to keep your head up and prepare as always … but at the same time … don’t let the media play you for a fool and keep you reacting on emotions.

I want to close with this short piece by Ron Paul, published orginally at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Paris and What Should Be Done by Ron Paul

The horrific attacks in Paris on Friday have, predictably, led to much over-reaction and demands that we do more of the exact things that radicalize people and make them want to attack us. The French military wasted no time bombing Syria in retaliation for the attacks, though it is not known where exactly the attackers were from. Thousands of ISIS fighters in Syria are not Syrian, but came to Syria to overthrow the Assad government from a number of foreign countries — including from France and the US.

Ironically, the overthrow of Assad has also been the goal of both the US and France since at least 2011.

Because the US and its allies are essentially on the same side as ISIS and other groups – seeking the overthrow of Assad – many of the weapons they have sent to the more “moderate” factions also seeking Assad’s ouster have ended up in the hands of radicals. Moderate groups have joined more radical factions over and over, taking their US-provided training and weapons with them. Other moderate groups have been captured or killed, their US-provided weapons also going to the radicals. Thus the more radical factions have become better equipped and better trained, while occasionally being attacked by US or allied planes.

Does anyone not believe this is a recipe for the kind of disaster we have now seen in Paris? The French in particular have been very active in arming even the more radical groups in Syria, as they push for more political influence in the region. Why do they still refuse to believe in the concept of blowback? Is it because the explanation that, “they hate us because we are free,” makes it easier to escalate abroad and crack down at home?

It may not be popular to say this as emotions run high and calls ring out for more bombing in the Middle East, but there is another way to address the problem. There is an alternative to using more military intervention to address a problem that was caused by military intervention in the first place.

That solution is to reject the militarists and isolationists. It is to finally reject the policy of using “regime change” to further perceived US and western foreign policy goals, whether in Iraq, Libya, Syria, or elsewhere. It is to reject the foolish idea that we can ship hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons to “moderates” in the Middle East and expect none of them to fall into the hands of radicals.

More bombs will not solve the problems in the Middle East. But a more promising approach to the Middle East is currently under fire from the isolationists in Washington. The nuclear deal with Iran ends UN sanctions and opens that country to international trade. Just last week the presidents of France and Iran met to discuss a number of trade deals. Other countries have followed. Trade and respect for national sovereignty trumps violence, but Washington still doesn’t seem to get it. Most presidential candidates compete to thump the table loudest against any deal with Iran. They will use this attack to propagandize against approving trade with Iran even though Iran has condemned the attack and is also in the crosshairs of ISIS.

Here is the alternative: Focus on trade and friendly relations, stop shipping weapons, abandon “regime change” and other manipulations, respect national sovereignty, and maintain a strong defense at home including protecting the borders from those who may seek to do us harm.

We should abandon the failed policies of the past, before it’s too late.

### End Article ###

And By The Way …

While I completely agree with Ron Paul’s assessment, I do not think for one moment that his advice will be followed by the US Government or France or any Government for that matter …

Which is why I think you should prepare now.

As more attacks are aimed at suspected terrorists, you’ll see more retaliation against the American people.

Don’t be ruled by fear, but be prepared. More is coming.

 

by -
2 3721

If you’ve ever been in a talk with someone who irrationally fears guns, wants to ban them, or thinks that “we need” more “sensible gun control laws”, then you might want to share this helpful information with them.

Namely, they are TWICE as likely to die from the prescription drugs they have sitting in their medicine cabinet than they are from the gun in their home, or your home, or in the hands of a criminal.

So says a new study released by the DEA showing results from the 2015 National Drug Threat Assessment (NDTA).

To be clear, I think that prescription drugs are WAY over-prescribed in the United States — and this lends some support to my view point — but I do recognize that the majority of my readers are on some form of prescription medication.

Given that nearly 70% of Americans are on at least one prescription drug and that more than half take at least two, I think this is valuable info to share with anyone.

The bottom line is that you hear so much about a “gun violence problem” from politicians and those in the complacent media these days but when you truly look at the data — in whole — from any source, you realize there is no such thing.

I’ll write more about this in the future, but for today, let’s talk about why you’re more likely to die from prescription drugs than firearms.

DEA Press Release: “… drug overdose deaths are the leading cause of injury death in the United States, ahead of deaths from motor vehicle accidents and firearms”

The DEA press release reads:

“DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg today announced results from the 2015 National Drug Threat Assessment (NDTA), which found that drug overdose deaths are the leading cause of injury death in the United States, ahead of deaths from motor vehicle accidents and firearms.  In 2013, more than 46,000 people in the United States died from a drug overdose and more than half of those were caused by prescription painkillers and heroin.”

And The Mises Institute published an article on the findings.

It’s important to note that these numbers from the DEA are for 2013, so all comparisons here are from 2013 as well, using numbers from the Centers for Disease Control.

To quote the excellent Mises article …

A drug overdose, with a death rate of 13.9 per 100,000, is almost four times as common as a cause of death than gun homicides (3.6 per 100,000). Death from prescription drugs (7.2 per 100,000) is twice as common as gun homicides.

deaths1

“Those are the total numbers. If you prefer your stats in the often used format of x per 100,000, here you go:

deaths2
“Obviously,  homicides aren’t exactly a leading cause of death in the US, and gun homicides, even less so. Accidental death by firearms (0.2 per 100,000) is a small blip.

“For all those concerned parents who think little Johnny is likely to get gunned down on the street would be better advised to keep tabs on their prescription painkillers, as Johnny is far more likely to die from popping those than from any gun in your house or in the hands of a school mate.

“And, of course, one is almost three times as likely to die in an auto accident (death rate of 10.7 per 100,000) than as a result of a homicide.

“Moreover, nothing listed here is even in the top ten of causes of death in the US.You’re much, much more likely to die from suicide, or “influenza and pneumonia”than anything listed above.

The Data Leaves No Question. The Facts Are There Is NO “Gun Violence Problem” In This Country …

The point I think that should be taken away from this data is that in the United States — where there are literally WAY more guns than people — the highest amount of guns per capita of all the countries in the WORLD …

… so called “gun violence” is not even in the top 10 list of ways you are likely to die in the United States.

In the chart below you can see the Top Ten Causes of Death, Plus Gun Homicides so you can compare.

deathtopten

Gun Control Is Purely About CONTROL, There Is Absolutely No Evidence It Will Positively Affect Public Safety …

In fact, there are mountains of evidence to the contrary — aka the places with the most gun control in the United States are often the ones with the most “gun violence”.

(If you notice, I continually put “gun violence” in quotes because it’s a form of propaganda speak that politicians and the media who want to push an anti-gun agenda use. Instead of saying, we have a problem with violence, they attach “gun violence” to it, so as to try and make it something worse or special. Basically they want to blame guns for the violence.)

So the next time you get to talking about gun control with someone who only gets their facts from the media, pandering politicians and talking heads on the TV, go ahead and share with them that they’re at least twice as likely to die from prescription meds than any firearm.

 

 

 

by -
7 4329

It may sound silly, but I had an unusual dream that woke me up this morning …

Me and a couple family members were driving in a truck near a river bank and we must have went too close, because the back end of the truck slipped over the edge and we all went over the side.

In my dream, it happened pretty fast and before the people in the car stopped cursing we started to sink. It’s fuzzy, but I think that it was a pond we were sinking into and mostly mud.

My first reaction was to take off my seatbelt to start climbing out, then I realized what the heck were my family members doing?

Then we started sinking faster, I got a little panicked and I woke up.

Unfortunately, I woke up from that dream (nightmare?) before we could all save each other, but it’s been on my mind.

After a little research I discovered that this happens to about 10,000 people each year.  In Canada alone, 10 percent of drowning deaths can be attributed to being submerged in a car, and about 400 North Americans die from being submerged in a car every year.

What’s the best way to escape from a sinking car?

Mythbusting: Don’t Wait For The Car To “Pressurize”

For I don’t know how long, I remember the advice I’ve always heard has been that when you are in a sinking car you should wait till the water completely submerges the car and fills the inside so that it pressurizes to the same degree as outside the car. Then you’re supposed to open the door.

This is true.

It will also most likely get you killed.

This is because it takes a while for the car to completely fill with water. In that time period, you have to remain calm, hold your breath, and make sure that the rest of your family holds their breath.

The TV show Mythbusters actually tested this and while Adam could eventually open the door, he ran out of breath first, and had to have his friend give him oxygen to wait it out. In real life he would be dead.

It “should” take about 30 seconds to a minute for the water to rise to the bottom of the passenger windows. That’s all assuming you landed “wheels first”. This is actually your best time to escape — while the car is “floating” a little bit and before it has started to sink quickly. In other words, the water has not yet reached the windows.

5 Steps to Save Yourself and Your Family

The number one thing to remember is to stay calm.

Remind yourself that you have a plan for this situation.

Start talking. You need to be calm and start telling your family the plan. We are all gonna get out of this car, and here is how we are going to do it.

Step 1: Wait To Call 911

If you can grab your cell phone, for sure grab it and stick it in a pocket. Now is NOT the time to waste your energy, breath, or very important seconds to call 911.

As soon as you get out of the car, you can call 911. Grab your cell phone but dont use it yet (if it’s within arms reach).

Step 2: Seatbelts

If you can’t grab your cell phone within 1 second, in other words, if it’s not within arms reach, then this is step 1.

You need to undue your seatbelt. Tell everyone in your car, “Everybody take your seat belt off now”.

If for some reason your seatbelt is stuck, then you will need to cut the seatbelt off.

Step 3: Window

You are going to ignore your door as a way to escape. There is too much pressure against it and if you do get it open it will let in more water which will drown the rest of your family too quickly.

The window is your best escape.

If you start moving quickly, within the first few seconds of hitting the water then you can probably still use your electric windows.

If you wait too long they may or may not short out and they won’t roll down. If you move quickly enough, then you can actually get out of the window before the water level is the height of the window.

If the water is already passing over the windows, you can still get out the window, just be aware that when you open the window a LOT of water is going to rush into your face, just hold your breath and be ready to swim past it as soon as possible.

If you can’t roll down the window then you need to break it. You can use any part of your body, but your legs are probably strongest and the best part to hit the window is the corner of the window near where the hinges are (the b pillar).

In the picture below you can see the “B pillar” labeled and my red arrow shows where to hit the window:

b-pillar-target

Here is Dr. Gordon Giesbrecht who did a study on escaping from sinking cars demonstrating the correct place to hit the window, and he lays in the back seat and kicks his feet through that spot:

where-to-kick-out-window

It’s worth mentioning that you should probably have a tool in your car that you can bust out the window with quickly and easily.

Step 4: Children

Because they’re your kids of course you’re going to want to save them first and in this scenario it’s actually a good idea.

Make sure the kids are unbuckled and after you open or break the window you’re gonna wanna push them out first and follow them through the window.

If you have younger/older kids then start with the oldest ones.

Step 5: Out!

Finally, get your kids out and then get out yourself.

The aforementioned Dr. Giesbrecht, a professor of kinesiology at the University of Manitoba, did a 2006 study, Automobile Submersion: Lessons in Vehicle Escapeand the results were promising using this strategy of escape.

What’s promising is, all the vehicles in Giesbrecht’s study floated before they sank. Float times varied between 30 seconds and two minutes.

If you keep calm and remember the simple plan – seatbelt, window, children, out — then that should be plenty of time for you to save your life and the life of your family.

In one instance, three adults and a child were all able to escape out of the driver’s side window in 51 seconds.

Can You Fit Through Your Car Window?

One more thing to think about …

Can you fit through your car window? If you are too obese to fit through your car window, and too big to be able to move around in your front seat to even position yourself to get out of the window (even if you fit) … or if it would be impossible for you to swivel around and kick out the window because you’re so out of shape or inflexible … then you should really try to get into shape.

Like most of what I share, this information is completely useless, if you lack the physical ability to pull it off.

It’s a simple fact of life that the more fit you are, the higher your levels of survivability.

In Conclusion …

My dream about sinking in a truck with my family inside was not pleasant, but with this plan I know I’ll be ready if the real thing ever happens.

Remember these 5 steps to get out of a sinking car and you’ll be fine too.

 

 

by -
15 4050

I don’t pay as much attention to the presidential debates as I did in the past because, let’s face it, no matter who wins it’s just going to be more of the same.

It’s called the Welfare/Warfare state …

In fact, I’m going to stick my neck out and call it now, Bush vs Clinton 2016 (the sequel! Wait … the trilogy? how many are we on now?)

bushclinton2016

But I must admit that I simply can’t believe that a self-proclaimed “Democratic Socialist” is running for president … and actually doing ok.

His name is Bernie Sanders if you haven’t heard, and yes, he’s definitely pushing socialist agendas.

Today, I’m going to let my friends at Laissez Faire weigh in on this monstrosity.

Take it away Chris …

#Feelthebern…

If you use any form of social media, and have any friends or followers at all, you’ve undoubtedly come across the hashtag.

And you also undoubtedly feel the ‘bern’ of yet another fellow American falling… yet again… for the socialist trap.

And here are some scary numbers to chew on this fine Monday afternoon…

According to social media analytics firm RiteTag, #Feelthebern is tweeted 625 times per hour.

With that, it’s getting 2.11 million views and being shared 883 times…

Yes… PER HOUR!

Also according to RiteTag, some of the latest pictures shared are…

warrenforsanders

bernie2016

repubsbernie

 Let’s face it. Bernie Sanders is ‘hot right now.’

And here’s the thing…

We don’t disagree with him on everything. In fact, here are just a few things we can say, from a 10,000 foot view, we agree with…

** Get big money out of politics.
** Create decent paying jobs.
** Care for our veterans.
** End the drug war.
** And on…

But how he plans to do most of these things, of course, is what we absolutely, unequivocally, without a single shred of doubt… completely… disagree with.

He’s a one-trick pony. His only solution is a bigger government to “better” redistribute wealth. Which, if history is any guide, doesn’t work.

Alas, some are doomed to repeat humanity’s mistakes. And they think that it makes perfect sense. Especially the majority of the millennials, who, caught in a trap of student debt, wish someone would wave a magic wand and make it all go away.

I know many of these people. And have heard many of them, on many different occasions, tell me that they don’t plan to ever pay off their debt. Their plan is to just let it fester until it’s absolved.

Seriously.

Apparently, enough millennials rubbed the lamp and… miraculously… out popped Uncle Bernie, here to soothe all their ills with free stuff.

bernie-brilliant

Oh, wait. There he is now, on his white unicorn…

unicorn-bernie

How will you do it, Bernie?

Raise the taxes.

But just on the rich, right?

No.

Wait… what? 

What most bernwashed Americans don’t get is it’s not the super rich who are going to #feelthebern… it’s them.

Everyone… we repeat… everyone is going to get taxed to death so our government can waste more of our money on illegal things Big Governments love to do…

The end result, of course, is that this country falls to its knees and stays there.

bernie-sanders

In the meantime, all the services that Bern is offering for free might become free — but they will also continue to degrade. And they will quickly become completely irrelevant in our society. A big waste of resources and time.

We can already see it happening in regards to education.

Many think Sanders is somehow ‘new,’ and ‘edgy,’ and he’s on the fringe.

When, in reality, he’s just spouting the same old [expletive deleted] that governments have always promised when a charismatic leader steps up in a time of crisis.

bernie-old-socialist

Bigger government. Bigger government. Bigger government. 

If that mantra doesn’t keep you up at night, you need a little dose liberty in your life.

Or maybe a whole lot. But that’s up to you to figure out.

by -
4 13215

Recently, a close family member asked me an important question:

“I want to take a large amount of cash out of my savings account. How can I do this without going to jail?”

At first blush, a person not paying attention to what’s been happening over the past couple of years would think this sounds like a crazy question for an American to ask …

After all, don’t we live in the Land of the Free?

Not so much …

You see, this family member had read numerous stories published over the past few years titled things like “How To Take Your Money Out Of The Bank Without Going To Prison“, etc

Are these just clickbait titles or is this a real concern?

Yes and No. Unfortunately, this is a part of living in America today. Here’s the story …

Why Would Anyone Need a Large Amount Of Cash Anywhere But Their Bank Account?

Because this was intended to be the “Land of the Free” so if I want to hoard a bunch of cash to swim through in my bathtub like Scrooge McDuck then, damnit, I’ll do it. So “just because” is a great answer.

But seriously, there are many reasons to have a large amount of cash on hand …

Sometimes you just need cash. There are certain situations where writing a check won’t work (or isn’t fast enough) and you can’t swipe your credit card (think friend-to-friend money exchanges, or some other such trival nonsense). I believe in accounting they call this “Petty Cash”.

For most of my readers, I think you want cash because you’re worried about some type of disruption in the normal operations of life, the banking system, and the economy (whether that’s short-term or long-term).

roosevelt-bank-holiday

Remember when socialist extraordinare President Franklin D Roosevelt declared a “bank holiday” and closed all the nation’s banks for about a week?

In an economic crisis, cash really is king. Bank withdraws are usually limited to a certain amount per day. ATM’s (if you can find one that’s not empty) limit the amount you can withdraw per day. Stores stay open but they stop accepting credit cards. And Cash really is king.

The people in Argentina, once their banks opened back up, saw their money devalued by the government to help pay the government’s debt. In Cyprus, they pioneered the “bail-in”, where they simply took the money out of accounts over a certain amount.

How Banks Are Now Unpaid Government Spies …

Simon Black of Sovereign Man explains …

” … senior official from the Justice Department spoke to a group of bankers about the need for them to rat out their customers to the police.

    “What a lot of people don’t realize is that banks are already unpaid government spies.

    “Federal regulations in the Land of the Free REQUIRE banks to file ‘suspicious activity reports’ or SARs on their customers. And it’s not optional.

    “Banks have minimum quotas of SARs they need to fill out and submit to the federal government.

    “If they don’t file enough SARs, they can be fined. They can lose their banking charter. And yes, bank executives and directors can even be imprisoned for noncompliance.

    “This is the nature of the financial system in the Land of the Free.

    “And chances are, your banker has filled one out on you—they submitted 1.6 MILLION SARs in 2013 alone.

    “But now the Justice Department is saying that SARs aren’t enough.

    “Now, whenever banks suspect something ‘suspicious’ is going on, they want them to pick up the phone and call the cops:

    “[W]e encourage those institutions to consider whether to take more action: specifically, to alert law enforcement authorities about the problem, who may be able to seize the funds, initiate an investigation, or take other proactive steps.”

    “So what exactly constitutes ‘suspicious activity’? Basically anything.

    “According to the handbook for the Federal Financial Institution Examination Council, banks are required to file a SAR with respect to:

    “Transactions conducted or attempted by, at, or through the bank (or an affiliate) and aggregating $5,000 or more…”

    “It’s utterly obscene. According to the Justice Department, going to the bank and withdrawing $5,000 should potentially prompt a banker to rat you out to the police.”

Obscene may not be quite a strong enough word for this behavior. But this is the world we’re living in now. Here’s how to deal with it …

Step One: Be Aware Of This. But Please Remember, You Are NOT a Criminal!

If you’re not a criminal, then there is no reason to feel like one. That’s the first step. Unfortunately, the Government does a good job of making you feel like one just for living and breathing and doing a simple thing like dealing in cash.

Stop it.

It’s your money that you’re ALLOWING the bank to hold and make money with, until you want it back.

THAT is what banks are.

Don’t forget that.

Second, they work for you. Your bank is your employee. You are the one who owns the money that you so graciously allow them to use (to again, make money with).

So you should be aware that you may be treated like a criminal but you are NOT a criminal.

Step Two: Develop a Relationship With Your Bankers

If you’re using a small town bank, or from a small town, you probably already do this.

Talk to your tellers, be nice. Ask about their kids, talk about yours. You know the deal. Be a normal person because that’s what you are. You’re not a criminal. You are a free American.

But don’t discount the power of personal relationships.

Step Three: Decide How Much Money You Need Outside the Financial System …

First, you probably can’t deal the rest of your life in entirely cash (though there are many people that do).

So you need to decide how much you need in cash outside the banking system.

FerFal, the author of the Modern Survival Manual: Surviving The Economic Collapseis a guy who lived through the 2001 Argentina Economic Crisis. Here is his advice on “How much cash should I have?”

Minimum:

    One month worth of basic expenses in cash. Think mortgage/rent, bills, car fuel and food.

    Better:

    One month worth of basic expenses + plane ticket for each family member to out of state/out of the country alternative location.

    People have been forced to relocate abroad many times in history. It has happened to millions in recent history, it could happen to you.

    ok:

    Three months worth of expenses + plane tickets for each family member + 1month deposit plus two more months worth of rent in potential BO country.

    This should cut you some slack to get settled and get back on your feet.

    Even better:

    Three months worth of expenses + plane ticket per family member + 1000usd/gold eagle bribe per family member + deposit and three months worth of rent + money for ok used car

    The more financial resources you have, the better your chances are and the less traumatic will the experience be. Some of this could be in the form of gold.” 

Those are some pretty good guidelines, but again the decision is up to you…

Considering many Americans don’t have much in savings anyways, do with that info what you will. The first piece of the most BASIC personal finance advice you will ever receive is to create an “emergency fund” of cash savings (most of the time financial gurus recommend saving it in a bank though).

Step Four: Get That Amount Out As Quickly As Possible.

In short, your bank WILL file a suspicious activity report (SAR), or a cash transaction report, or whatever other surveillance state B.S. report they will file on you.

Who cares.

That’s what you have to realize …

The problem is that you are ALREADY in the system. The bank knows all your personal details about you and so do the Feds (thanks to the income taxes you’ve paid every year of your life).

You can’t hide anything from them at this point.

Further, you are at MORE risk trying to avoid the reporting requirements.

Here’s why …

Scenario A: Trying to be covert, our hero tries to make a withdrawel of $1,000 here … $3,500 there … and $2,000 a short time later. Not only does the bank file reports on him at every  transaction, but now he–innocently I might add, because he’s not a criminal–can now be convicted of breaking “structuring” laws.

Structuring is the act of making an effort to avoid reporting cash transactions by breaking up one transaction into a series of smaller amounts.

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Dennis Hastert, who — ironically — helped force through Congress stricter laws against anonymous cash transactions, actually got charged with this.

Former New York Attorney General Elliot Spitzer faced the same charge when he was trying to withdraw less than $10,000 at a time to pay his prostitutes.

The point is, you can’t avoid having reports filed on you in this day and age of living in the United Surveillance States of America (OhMyGod! I think I just made up a new buzzword!)

The bottom line in this scenario is that by trying to be sneaky, a large amount of cash was still in this person’s bank account when they did draw unwanted attention and that cash will be frozen there, completely useless at this point. Worrying about an economic crisis is not even a concern, because now this person can’t even put food on the table or hire a lawyer to help defend themselves against federal charges.

Scenario B: You are not a criminal, but you understand the system is setup to treat you like one. You develop a personal relationship with your banker. You call and tell them ahead of time that you need to withdraw a large amount of cash for personal reasons on XYZ date, can they make sure that they have that much cash on hand for you?

Why no, you don’t want a cashiers check because you simply want to hold this amount of your savings in cash for personal reasons. You refuse their other veiled-or-not-so-veiled requests to keep your money in their bank. If they persist with the sales pressure, you kindly help them understand that, at the end of the day it’s your money and you really do need it and you’re very thankful for the help they’re going to give you to make this happen as easily as possible. Hopefully, your personal relationship with them will help.

You go in, get your cash, take the proper personal security precautions (because you’re now walking out with a large amount of cash) and all the money you want out of the bank is out of the bank.

If you do draw unwanted attention, and they go to freeze your funds, at least you have that money out so you can survive and feed your family while you find a lawyer to prove your innocence because–again–you are not a criminal. (But you do need a lawyer, watch “Dont talk to Police” for more.)

The Bottom Line?

If you’re going to use the banking system, and most people do need to use it in today’s world, then you need to know you’re already in the system …

The best you can do is work with it, to take the appropriate actions to minimize your risk.

Holding an appropriate amount of cash outside of the banking system is always a prudent thing to do.

Remember, you’re not a criminal and there’s nothing illegal about withdrawing your money from the bank. Simply go about it as logically and straightforward as possible and the most inconvenient thing will be resisting the sales pressure of the bank people trying to get you to keep your money in their bank (or give you a check instead of cash).

 

by -
17 29770

Recently, I’ve touched on a few news stories where unarmed people have fought back against an Active Killer and either prevailed or saved some lives in the process.

Then I saw some comments on those articles and was reading some other articles when I realized I needed to make sure something was clear.

I wrote in one article that my first priority was to get my family to safety in an Active Killer situation …

But what I didn’t explain was that this first response — running — may very well get you killed.

This is all the more important because numerous law enforcement agencies have released some form of RUN. HIDE. FIGHT.® as the standard response to Active Killers.

But there are plenty of times when you should definitely not run because it will get you killed.

Here’s why …

What Are We Talking About Here?

There have been a few Law Enforcement Agencies that have put out videos or reports on how to survive Active Killer situations. While a lot of the info is good, they recommend a standard approach of always running first, then hiding if you can’t run, then fighting only if you can’t run or hide.

While this sounds good on the surface, the information could get you killed.

Here is the youtube video created by the City of Houston, Texas and the Department of Homeland Security that has millions of views so far so clearly a lot of people have heard of this approach.

How Can Running Get You Killed?

My major concern over this advice is that if you think the first response should ALWAYS be running, then you are wrong.

Running should ONLY be your response, if you already have the distance from the killer to make running a viable option.

In other words, your distance from the threat could be one of the most important variables as to how you should respond. 

If you are in another room and the shooter can’t see you, then by all means run away from the threat.

But if you are in the same room as the attacker, and he is about to shoot you, running will most likely get you killed.

The sad part is, the Ready Houston video actually shows you exactly how running can get you killed. Let me show you screenshots.

The RUN. HIDE. FIGHT.® video starts with a scenario where the active killer walks into an office building, nobody is paying attention, and he pulls a shotgun from his bag …

turn on images to see the active killer

Then he starts his killing spree by shooting the security guard (who wasn’t paying attention) with the shotgun …

turn on images

The woman next to the security guard screams and watches the killer rack another shell into the shotgun before shooting her as well. Then the killer turns around to face the rest of the room.

At this point, shots have been fired, the woman next to the murdered security guard has screamed — other people in the room are alerted — and have started to run away from the threat.

Now, Here’s My Problem With The “Rule” Of Running As a First Resort

We see a guy walking into the room, unaware or not yet processing the situation …

The killer looks over his shoulder, sees the guy coming into the room, and then turns to face him with the shotgun.

Here is the moment of truth. You can see the guy finally realizes that there is a killer looking at him, he has a gun, and he has bad intent. You can even see the beginnings of a “startle response” action with his shoulders shrugging up — he’s surprised and realizes his life is in danger.

At this point, it’s the fight or flight response we all have heard so much about. So what does he do?

He turns around and tries to run.

And of course, he gets shot in the back by the killer.

If You Come Face-To-Face With The Killer, Running Is The Wrong Move

In my opinion, charging the attacker would of been the correct answer in that situation.

Would he have still gotten killed?

Maybe. Maybe not.

He did get killed by running. Further, he reduced his chances of survival to zero by turning around and running. You can’t outrun a bullet in this case.

Now, notice I’m not saying to NEVER run …

Take a look at the moment this guy who chose the WRONG answer of running again (because he was already being targeted and in the process of being engaged by the killer).

turn on images to see the only time you should run

Look behind the shooter, the guy I drew an arrow at. He is using the running strategy correctly because A) the killer can’t see him and B) he’s actually further away from the killer.

Now, ideally it would be nice if you didn’t have to charge a man pointing a gun at you.

The truth is: that is really bad situation. In this particular scenario, the guy has a shotgun too. That really sucks because shotguns are pretty powerful (the fact is, if this guy had a handgun, you have a much, much better chance of charging him and surviving even if you were shot multiple times).

But it is what it is.

And the only other responses are to 1.) Run (which will get you shot in the back as you just saw) or 2.) Hide, which is impossible because he saw you, he is pointing the gun at you, and you are nowhere near cover or concealment.

So just go. Attack. Charge.

Inside of 5 Yards, You Should Sidestep and Then Charge.

This sounds silly, and it seems silly, but it should work just as well if you’re unarmed as it does if you’re armed.

The pictures below are from actual surveillance video footage in a gas station. This is one of Tom Given’s students, a little old Asian lady (50+ yrs old at time of incident) with only a little training, who when she had a criminal shove a gun in her face simply sidestepped, drew her gun and shot him in the chest.

Here you can see the armed robber trying to hold up one of Tom’s graduates from about 3-5 steps away (Tom says it was only about 15 feet from the door to the counter in the store).

Tom’s student responds by sidestepping to the left as she draws her gun, presents it at eye level, uses both hands and shoots him center mass (you can see the attacker reacting from the shot in this picture).

This works because of the concept of “tunnel vision” that the criminal is experiencing because his physiological condition is in fight mode.

Inside of 5 yards, simply sidestepping puts you outside the “zone” he is intensely focused on and then — as you see in this case — you have time to draw a gun.

In our example, fighting unarmed against an active killer, if you’re this close, then sidestepping should buy you some amount of time to start charging into the killer.

Inside of 5 yards, at closer distances, sidestepping can help. Don’t bother at longer distances however because the distance gives the attacker more vision, just simply charge.

Ever Heard of The Tueller Principle?

There is a concept, usually demonstrated through a drill on the range to teach police officers the idea of “how close is too close” to be near a dangerous suspect before drawing their firearm.

Essentially a Police Officer named Mr. Tueller took the average time for his officers to draw from their holster and shoot a man sized target at seven yards which was 1.5 seconds — and then decided to see how long it would take someone to cover the same distance (7 yards/21 feet).

Tueller explains (emphasis mine)…

“So we had one recruit officer play the role of the “bad guy” and another played the role of the “startled officer.” We put them 21 feet apart, and when the bad guy role player decided to start his attack, we started the stopwatch, and when the bad guy made contact with the good guy, we stopped the watch. I was quite stunned to discover that the time was roughly 1 1/2 seconds!

Then we tried the same exercise with everyone available in the class – some younger, some older, big and small, male and female – and all of them could run that seven yard distance in about 1 1/2 seconds. Of course, this was before Simunitions® or Airsoft®, but later we did test it with dart pistols. What we found was that if you’re ready and if everything goes perfectly, you might get the gun out and get a shot off before the bad guy role player makes contact…”

What is my point?

Even at about 21 feet away, roughly 7 yards from a guy with a gun, you can charge him and be fairly certain you’ll be able to make contact in 1.5 seconds or less.

In the example we’re using — in this scenario — the killer doesn’t look any further than about 20 feet away.

In his mind, he expects the victims to run from him in terror. He doesn’t expect a direct counterattack.

Having a victim charge him instead — puts him into reactive mode — in other words he’ll have to react to your attack instead of being the aggressor.

Granted, that doesn’t buy you much time, but it certainly helps.

Either way you look at it, my point is simply that even a direct charge may be more effective than you think.

And no matter what, it’s infinitely more effective than simply turning around and running and giving the killer all the time in the world to shoot you in the back.

So to wrap this up …

Running can be a good tactic … but … it can also make you an easy target.

There is no possible way that we could talk about every possible scenario you could find yourself in during a life or death situation.

In my recent article about the Paris train terrorist attack, had the three men decided to run when the killer’s AK-47 jammed instead of attack — I’m nearly 100% sure everyone in the train would of died because there was nowhere to go. They were in a “steel tunnel of death” with only one direction to run and nowhere to escape, they would of all piled into each other, trampling each other trying to get through the bottleneck of the exit door to the next train cart, while the shooter shot them all like fish in a barrel (he probably would not have even needed to aim, just point the gun at the mass of people and pull the trigger).

Instead, the brave men that responded saw the killer pause for an instant and attacked, holding him down, beating him, and choking him out before restraining him saving potentially dozens of lives.

My only point is that you should only run if it is the correct time to run. 

If the killer sees you, or is pointing a gun at you, and you’re anywhere within 20 feet of the guy, your best bet is probably to attack him because running and hiding are off the table.

by -
11 3449
Recently, another crazie decided to try and become famous by attempting to murder as many people as possible at Umpqua Community College in Oregon.

I’m not going to focus much on the killer in this instance — because it truly is the same old story and it seems they mostly want fame for their actions — so let’s talk about the hero.

What do we know about this guy Chris Mintz?

How did he fight back? What did he do? Did it work?

And finally, what can you learn from this event?

Who is Chris Mintz?

turn on imags to see the awesome chris mintz

A crazy guy decided to shoot up a community college in Oregon and one of the students who fought back was a guy named Chris Mintz.

According to the info I’ve found (and it’s hard to be accurate with conflicting news reports coming out left and right so close to these events), Chris played football in school, then was in the Army for at least 3 years. He also had faught and practiced MMA and had even done 2 amateur MMA boughts (1 win, 1 loss) a few years ago. He was also training to be a fitness instructor while taking courses at the community college.

He also had a 6 year old son, who it appears had his birthday that same day that Chris was shot.

What Did He Do?

The details are still fuzzy at this point. First accounts had Chris “charging the shooter”. Later accounts say that he told others to move to a safe place and he went either outside a door to confront the shooter, or blocked a door to keep the shooter from getting in.

Either way he was shot at least three times for his efforts, and then when he was laying on the ground he “Looks up at the gunman and says, ‘It’s my son’s birthday today,’ ” his aunt said — and he was shot at least two more times and then the shooter moved on.

It appears that both his legs were broken, but no vital organs were hit, and Chris is in the midst of making a full recovery in the hospital now (all the news reports say he’ll have to learn to walk again).

It appears that Chris slowed the killer down and might be responsible for saving an entire classroom full of people.

In short, Chris Mintz is a hero.

Should YOU Fight Back Against An Active Killer If You’re Unarmed?

There is a simple answer to this question: if you have to.

Here’s what I mean by that …

If I’m with my family — my wife, my kids — my first responsibility is their safety. If I can escape with them safely, then that is the first priority.

If I happen to be a in place where I have a gun with me, then I can provide armed resistance as I’m getting my family to safety, if needed.

But, let’s put ourselves in Chris’ shoes here …

We’re unarmed. There’s no family to worry about. It’s just you and the Active Killer coming down the hallway.

Let me quickly cover something important …

Whatever You Do, Talking Is NOT The Solution …

Let me take a moment to discuss the possibility of “talking down” the active killer.

In short, if the guy coming down the hall has spent the last 2 minutes shooting everyone else he has walked by, then he wants to shoot you too.

DO NOT ATTEMPT TO TALK HIM DOWN.

This is so stupid as to border on unbelievable.

I am aware of only maybe two times that this has “worked”. Just don’t do it. It’s possibly the worst survival/resistance strategy possible …

For the rare instance that it has worked, it has been complete divine providence and outright dumb luck on the part of the victims.

Here’s what you have to understand: Asocial vs social violence.

An active killer that goes into a school (or any other gun free zone) and starts shooting people (or even at people) is not operating within the social dynamics of society. They are operating in the realm of Asocial violence OK?

Trying to respond by “talking down” or with “intelligence” is responding with social skills. This is not the solution. It will not work because this is NOT a social situation. You will be murdered and the killer will smile as he feels the godlike power of shooting someone begging for their life or begging for his mercy.

The difference between a social violence conversation and asocial violence conversation is VAST.

The guy in the bar talking trash at you to impress his buddies, then only trying to “fight” when his buddies grab his arms and are already holding him back is not actually committed to violence. He doesn’t even want to fight. He is only communicating within the social realm of violence. You can successfully, and almost always should, talk down that situation. Swallow your pride and ego and make it go away non-violently because violence is not the only solution.

The asocial violent criminal comes up behind you without you even knowing and starts jamming a knife in your kidneys to start the conversation about how he wants to acquire your wallet. He just wants to kill you or your property, at that point it doesn’t matter. The WRONG thing to do is turn around and ask the guy jamming a knife into your body why they are doing what they’re doing, why they picked you, or “could you please stop?” or “please have some mercy?”

Talking is useless in a situation where you are faced with an Active Killer (unless you’re somehow using it to set up a violent counterattack such as a distraction, but I don’t really see that working well either).

I hope you understand that critical point. This is not a social situation, so don’t treat it like one. He has already initiated violence, therefore if you can’t escape and are confronted with the killer, violence is the ONLY solution.

You Should Fight Back If You Are Unarmed And There’s No Other Option

My buddy Greg Ellifritz has a great article on fighting back against Active Killers when you are unarmed. He makes some great points, and you should click here to read that article.

Among them, he points out that even unarmed resistance (if you can’t escape) works. “With that said, unarmed attacks against armed killers frequently do work.  Ron Borsch’s research on active killer events suggest that roughly one half of active killer attacks are stopped during the shooting.  Nearly 2/3 of the killers who are stopped are stopped by UNARMED citizens.  Police stop less than 20% of active killers during their act.”

He recommends:

1. Wait for a good opportunity
2. Set an Ambush
3. Get some help
4. And utilize Chokes and Improvised Weapons

That’s all great advice, and you should read Greg’s full article.

What else?

If A Gun Is Shoved In Your Face, Or You’re Close Enough To Talk To The Killer, Do Not Beg, Simply Attack

Let’s say your tactics suck or it just is not your lucky day. And before you know it, or even really know what’s going on, you come face to face with the killer and he’s pointing a gun at you.

In my opinion, now would be the time to attack him as violently and quickly as possible. 

As Jeff Cooper notes in his Principles of Personal Defense (emphasis mine) …

…On a realistic note, I can point out that in every single successful defense against violent attack that I know of and I have studied this matter for nearly three decades –the attacker was totally surprised when his victim did not wilt.

“The speed, power, efficiency, and aggressiveness of the counterattack varied greatly, but the mere fact of its existence was the most elemental component of its success.”

Active Killers like this have never been hardened criminals or street gang members. They’re often outcasts of society, weak and cowardly who want fame and attention by getting the highest body count of unarmed, defenseless victims as possible. This is why when confronted they often either give up, get shot, or shoot themselves.

What this means is they have a plan and have fantasized about how it will all go down. They kit up, grab a gun or two, and they’re gonna go in a gun free school zone where nobody is going to shoot back at them. They’re then going to see everyone fleeing from them, scared to death, in awe of the power over life and death that they wield and then they’re going to systematically murder as many of them as possible as quickly as possible before dying. They are going to get off on hearing people beg for their lives because for once NOW they’re the bully, now they’re going to make other people the victims.

As the man said, “Everyone has a plan until you get punched in the face”.

Violently attacking an active shooter is a way to mess up his plans severely.

If you start attacking keep attacking and trying to take him out of the fight. If you’re hitting him, don’t stop. If you’re trying to strangle him, don’t stop until he stops moving.

Keep fighting until you win.

I’ve written before that you should probably start preparing now to be tougherbecause it would be a good thing if your first experience with belly-to-belly violence wasn’t when your life depended on it.

Keep in mind that Chris Mintz was not only a veteran, but before that he played football and wrestled in high school, was involved in some form of mixed martial arts and even did two amateur MMA fights.

In other words, he did hard things, and when the moment of truth arrived it was natural for him to respond aggressively because he spent a lifetime training that way.

His aunt credited his MMA and wrestling background in an interview with NBC. “He was on the wrestling team and and he’s done cage-fighting so it does not surprise me that he would act heroically,” said Sheila Brown.

I’ll repeat it again …

You Can Do It Too, But You Need To Build The Warrior Mindset Everyday

Basically, stop taking it easy.

Challenge yourself. Build your resilience. Do hard stuff.

Stop watching so much TV.

Are you overweight? Start working out. Will it suck at first? Sure, because you’re soft.

Go on a diet. Yes, it sucks. Good. Embrace the suck. Stop taking it easy on yourself.

Get pissed when you see a killer attack like this happen and make an effort to go get in shape and train your mind and body to be ready.

Get tough.

I’ll close once more with the words of Jeff Cooper from Principles of Personal Defense:

“There is always an element of luck in any sort of conflict, and I know of no way to guarantee success in every instance.

What I do know, however, is that if the victims of the dozen or more sickening atrocities that have gained nationwide fame in recent years had read this book, and had heeded what they read, they would have survived those actions.

Additionally, a small but select number of goblins would not be alive today, bounding in and out of courts and costing us all money that could be much better spent.

George Patton told his officers, “Don’t worry about your flanks. Let the enemy worry about his flanks.” It is high time for society to stop worrying about the criminal, and to let the criminal start worrying about society. And by “society” I mean you.” 

by -
9 6920

Most Americans are soft.

There. I said it.

America was built on hope, tenacity, grit and NEVER giving up until what needed to get done … got done.

Unfortunately, it seems that a combination of incredible advancements in technology and the systematic indoctrination provided by state sponsored education has all but bred out the self-reliant nature that characterized the American of decades past.

I bring this up because I took another shooting class this past weekend and the instructor mentioned the “Warrior Mindset” which he basically defined as doing whatever it takes to win. Period.

Are you hurting? Who cares.
Are you injured? Shot? Keep fighting.
Feel like quitting? Quit when the job is done.

I bring this up because:

1.) New research is proving I’m right. More on that below …

2.) Four Americans (and one Briton) showed warrior mindset recently during a terrorist attack and saved potentially dozens of lives by responding unarmed.

They’re heroes and I’ll tell you why you need to be (and can be) more like them.

Four UNARMED Americans, and One Briton Take Out AK-47 Wielding Terrorist On a High Speed Train

A terrorist whipped out his AK47 on board a high speed train — with over 500 passengers — that was traveling from Amsterdam to Paris on Friday, August 21, 2015.

Johnny Jihad* decided he was going to slay some unarmed civilians that were riding on this train. My guess is the Charlie Hebdo attacks went so well in Paris, that he thought he was going to have a much higher body count considering all 500 of his intended victims were locked inside a high speed steel tunnel o’ death (If you know anything about bullet richochet dynamics — one guy with a rifle in a long, long tube full of people can do a LOT of damage).

Details are still hard to put together (as is often the case shortly after these events happen) but here’s the basic story as I understand it:

The Terrorist pops into the train car with his AK47 …

A french-American civilian named Mark Mooligan (from my home state of Virginia!) was one of the first to react. Moogalian made sure his wife was behind a seat before confronting the gunman (it’s unclear at this point, but it appears an unamed frenchman might have tackled/charged the gunman first).  Mooligan wrestled the Kalashnikov from the terrorist, who then drew a sidearm and shot Moogalian in the neck before taking back the AK47.

National Guardsman Skarlatos, of Roseburg, Oregon, said the first thing he heard was a gunshot.

“Just hit me on the shoulder and said ‘Let’s go.‘”

U.S. Airman Stone, his friend, of Carmichael, California, said said he was waking up from a deep sleep (by the gunshot no doubt) when Skarlatos “just hit me on the shoulder and said ‘Let’s go.'”

Stone and Skarlatos moved in to tackle the gunman and their friend, a civilian, Sadler moved in to help.

“All three of us started punching” him, Stone said. Stone, who was stabbed in the neck and sliced on his hand, said the attacker kept pulling out weapons from his bag (like the boxcutter he cut him with) as he was in the process of choking the terroist unconscious.

Norman, a 62 year old British businessman thought: “OK, I’m probably going to die anyway so let’s go.” and helped the Americans wrestle the terrorist down.

Once they had the bad guy tied up and under control, U.S. Airman Stone went and helped stop the bleeding on Mooligan’s throat gunshot wound. Stone said he “just stuck two of my fingers in his hole and found what I thought to be the artery, pushed down and the bleeding stopped.” He said he kept the position until paramedics arrived.

American heroes

A Warrior Mindset Is Way More Important Than Being Armed.

Given the choice, I would of liked to have a gun in that situation. Then I could of “air mailed” violence into the bad guys center mass and ocular cavity.

But the point is that 3 or 4 unarmed people decided that they were not victims.

They saw a bad guy starting to use violence against themselves and other people, so they rushed him and delivered heaping doses of violence on him instead.

It didn’t matter that they were unarmed because they decided not to be victims.

Their mindset was critical. Sadler said, “At that time, it was either do something or die.”

“He kept pulling more weapons left and right,” said Stone, his arm in a sling from injuries suffered in the struggle. “He seemed like he was ready to fight to the end. So were we.”

The 62 year old Briton told reporters that, once he got over his initial fear when the gunman emerged and opened fire, he decided to act, telling himself: “I would rather die being active trying to get him down than simply sit in the corner and be shot.”

The point? Choose right now you will never be a victim. If you are ever faced with violence, fight back viciously. Never give up.

The Problem Is That Most Americans Have Lost Their Grit and Toughness.

There is a ton I could say about this, but basically Americans today are soft and it will get you killed.

There is even a ton of research being done right now proving (as if it’s not obvious) that being tough and trying harder are the keys to success in anything.

Angela Duckworth of the University of Pennsylvania wrote a paper saying grit, not IQ, was the best predictor of success. The authors cycle back several times to the “marshmallow study,” which found that small children who could resist eating a marshmallow for 15 minutes on the promise of getting another were more likely to have life success than their more impulsive peers.

Asian Americans, they argue, succeed not because they have higher IQs, but because they spend less time watching TV, playing soccer, and hanging out at the mall, and more time drilling their times tables, practicing their violins, and reading. The authors’ highlight the research showing that Asian students with an IQ of 103 get higher grades than white students with the same IQ.

It’s no secret that first generation minority groups of all stripes succeed more often than white Anglo-Saxon Protestants these days. It’s because they’re still tough. They’re still hungry.

Here’s the thing …

You will NOT rise to the occasion

If you’re my typical reader, you are reading this going “yeah that’s right, I’m tough too and I would fight back”.

But would you? But you’re probably overweight. You most likely haven’t sparred or hit or grappled or wrestled with anyone in a long time (if ever). And you may not be able to perform like you think you can even if you had a gun (because you don’t practice).

In other words, you’ve basically spent your entire life giving up. And you think you’re going to magically rise to the occasion — and not give up — during a crisis when it’s the HARDEST time to do so?

Think about it …

But you may still be right. Maybe. And you might get lucky and there are 3 other 20 something dudes there to help you fight back (like the 62 year old Briton). Or the bad guy could be inept and not willing to fight harder than you.

Continually Doing Hard Things = Warrior Mindset

I applaud your warrior mindset, but the reality is that the surefire way to develop the warrior mindset is to continually do hard things.

The instructor at the last class I took pointed out that past athletes or men that spend their early lives doing HARD STUFF do dramatically better at all special operations selection courses.

The Navy even commissioned a study aimed at determining which high school and college athletes had the best potential to graduate from the SEAL training course. Capt. Adam Curtis, SEAL recruiter said:

“We analyzed 10 years of BUD/S training data and interviewed successful and unsuccessful candidates to distinguish characteristics of young men more likely to finish training. We found that seven sports – water polo, triathlon, lacrosse, boxing, rugby, swimming and wrestling – have athletes who are more likely than average candidates to succeed.”

I will bet you dollars to donuts that the particular sports — other than being hard — have nothing to do with it.

The point is that kids that grow up doing hard stuff, like staying dedicated to a physical sport — even when it sucks — grow up to be hard, gritty, successful adults. Period.

You Can Do It Too, But You Need To Build The Warrior Mindset Everyday

Basically, stop taking it easy.

Challenge yourself. Build your resilience. Do hard stuff.

Stop watching so much TV.

Are you overweight? Start working out. Will it suck at first? Sure, because you’re soft.

Go on a diet. Yes, it sucks. Good. Embrace the suck. Stop taking it easy on yourself.

Get pissed when you see a terrorist attack like this happen and make an effort to go get in shape and train your mind and body to be ready. Adopt the warrior mindset.

“Molon Labe!”

Caleb Lee Signature

Caleb Lee

P.S. * Johnny Jihad is not the terrorist’s real name.

P.P.S. “Somewhere a true believer is training to kill you.  He is training with minimum food and water, in austere conditions, day and night.  The only thing clean on him is his weapon.  He doesn’t worry about what workout to do — his rucksack weighs what is weighs, and he runs until the enemy stops chasing him.  The true believer doesn’t care how hard it is; he knows that he either wins or dies.  He doesn’t go home at 1700; he is home.  He only knows the cause.  Now.  Who wants to quit?”

— Attributed to NousDefionsDoc, admin for the Professional Soldiers forum.

RANDOM POSTS

0 57
The phrase ".357" has a certain connotation that goes along with it. Many people thing of it (as in ".357 Magnum") as a tough...