Thanks again to all, and I hope you enjoy the second issue!
Live Free,
Ed Corcoran - Editor, Survivalist Magazine
Reader Feedback
by Ed Corcoran
We received a couple of emails from readers in response to last issue’s article: “The Only True Currency in a Post-Collapse World.”
Chris S. writes:
“I agree with the author’s basic premise that food, water, tools, bullets, skills, etc. are the premier items to have during a breakdown. But don’t throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. The precious metals will still have a vital role.”
...and from Kathy H.:
“I believe he is correct in many of his thoughts, [however] the idea that Silver and Gold are [… ] something that we as true lovers of Liberty, Freedom and ultimately survival should not be concerned about having, I think is wrong.”
In response, I would just like to clarify that I was in no way suggesting that people should not invest in gold or silver as a security against hyper-inflation. However, I see a dangerous school of thought developing which leads people to believe that owning precious metals means you don’t need to store vital necessities or learn valuable skills. This gives people the false sense of security that their gold or silver will allow them to simply buy whatever they need to survive after a collapse.
The article was written with a worst-case, total collapse scenario in mind, in which food and necessities simply are no longer available and barter is the primary form of commerce. When supply lines permanently shut down and families are starving, items that are immediately useful -- like food or ammunition -- will have a lot more purchasing power than a shiny gold coin. As contributing writer John Milandred put it: “I’d rather trade for a bar of lead than a bar of gold... At least I can make bullets with the lead!”
In short, I believe that owning precious metals as a hedge against hyper-inflation is indeed a good idea. But it is no substitute for having life-sustaining supplies, preps, and gear.
I appreciate your feedback -- and keep the letters coming! - Ed
Send Your Feedback to: [email protected]
Unarmed Combat: Vital Targets, Improvised Weapons and Natural Body Defenses
by Jim Cobb
Being a survivalist encompasses much more than just stockpiling endless cases of toilet paper and beef stew in anticipation of the Great Collapse. It is a way of thinking that should permeate your life.
Many of you hold concealed carry permits and indeed are armed throughout much of your daily routine. However, Murphy’s Law has a way of imposing itself, and the one occasion you aren’t carrying your Kimber or Glock might be the time you are attacked or somehow placed in danger. Thus it isn’t a bad idea to consider what you can do to protect yourself without the use of weapons. Being a survivalist means you are prepared to survive whatever life throws at you, whether it is a temporary power outage, a pandemic, or an attack by a street thug.
In all but the most extreme situations, the overall purpose of using unarmed combat techniques is to incapacitate your attacker in such a way that you are able to put distance between you and him. Whether you use that distance to get help, recover your firearm, or just flee is your call, based on the situation at hand.
With that in mind, let’s look at some of the body parts that are particularly vulnerable and thus well suited for exploitation in self-defense.
Eyes: Obviously if your attacker can’t see you, it is difficult for him to continue the attack. A jab to an eye will not only cause tremendous pain, it will cause the eye to water, obstructing the vision. In close quarters, a feint to the eyes will cause the attacker to flinch and close his eyes, giving you an opportunity for a follow-up move. If nothing else, tossing sand or dirt into the eyes may distract the attacker long enough for you to get away.
Ears: An open-hand palm slap against the ear can damage the inner ear, causing both pain and disorientation. Grasping the ear and pulling can cause it to tear from the head, which – to say the least – is not only incredibly painful but quite demoralizing.
Nose: A sharp strike to the nose may cause it to break, but will certainly cause tissues to swell and send blood running down the throat, making it difficult for the attacker to breathe. Nose injuries can also cause the eyes to water excessively.
Throat: A punch or hand strike to the front of the throat will cause choking and difficulty breathing. It is a potentially lethal strike.
Fingers: By grabbing and twisting an attacker’s finger, you could break or dislocate it. This is very painful and causes almost immediate swelling, making it difficult to continue using the affected hand.
Diaphragm: Located just below the sternum, this is the muscle that controls the lungs. A solid strike causes it to spasm, resulting in a loss of breath. The downside though is if the attacker is wearing a heavy coat, it might be difficult to strike hard enough to get through those layers of padding.
Groin: This is the most obvious anatomical vulnerability on a man. Even a glancing blow causes pain and nausea. If you’re unable to make room for a decent swing, try grabbing and squeezing hard. Of course, this is also the first area of the body a man learns to protect as a child. A male assailant will instinctively try to block strikes to this area, which will leave him vulnerable elsewhere.
Knees: It takes surprisingly little pressure to dislocate a knee when striking from it from the side. Even a kick that misses the target slightly can cause the kneecap to tear from its moorings, resulting in mind-numbing pain. Plus, the attacker has a hard time running after you if his knee doesn’t work.
Even if you don’t have a firearm or fighting knife with you, there are several improvised weapons likely at your disposal.
A ballpoint pen can be used to stab or poke targets such as eyes, throat, and ears. I recommend carrying something a bit more substantial than a cheap plastic disposable “stick” pen. You can pick up better ones at any office supply store. You want something that has a little weight to it, such as an imitation Mont-blanc or a similarly hefty writing utensil.
Keys may be clenched in the fist, with the serrated ends protruding from between the fingers. Rake these across the face of your attacker for best results.
When possible, I like to carry a walking stick. There’s no need to go out and spend fifty bucks or more on a fancy cane; just go over to your local home improvement store. Buy a four-foot-long dowel, roughly an inch and a half thick. You could paint it or customize it any way you like. A walking stick like this will allow you to poke, bludgeon, or trip your attacker, as well as hopefully keep some distance between the two of you.
A roll of quarters held in a fist is an old standby and works very well.
A cell phone can be used to smash the face or head of your attacker. However, bear in mind this likely will damage your phone, which would inhibit your ability to call for help.
If you carry a purse or shoulder bag, you could swing it around and strike your attacker in the face or head. However, this shouldn’t be your first defensive move, as it is easily telegraphed to your attacker and all he has to do is duck and grab the bag from you.
Look around and you can perhaps find a rock or empty bottle to use against your attacker.
In addition to these improvised weapons, the body has several natural weapons you can utilize. A closed fist is usually the first natural weapon we learn growing up. Remember not to close your fingers around your thumb when making a fist. That’s a good way to break your thumb if you punch.
While a closed fist is effective in some situations, your hands can also be used in other ways – some of which will minimize the damage you can inflict on yourself by using a closed-hand strike.
Fingers, jabbing into an eye is quite effective, as long as the attacker isn’t well-versed in Stooges-Fu. Don’t just extend your index finger like you’re pointing at him and thrust. Instead, jab forward with all four fingers extended.
Take your left hand and, palm o
ut, extend your thumb to the side, making an L shape. That web of skin running from the base of your index finger to the base of your thumb on either hand is all but impossible to injure through blunt force. If you strike a throat so that web of skin is what impacts the windpipe, you’ll hardly feel a thing.
You can also use an open hand for striking. The heel of your palm works well against a nose or chin. Using a classic “karate chop” strike against the throat is very effective as well.
Grabbing and twisting fingers can cause enough pain to allow you to get some distance between you and your attacker.
Fingernails can be used for scratching and gouging. This is particularly effective when the face is the target.
The elbow is great for impact attacks. Jab it backward into an attacker’s midsection. You can also use it to strike upwards at an attacker’s face.
Due to the risk of disease, I hesitate to suggest biting an attacker. However, if you clamp down on an attacker like he’s a piece of BBQ chicken, he is likely going to be dissuaded from pursuing the matter further.
A knee to the groin is often effective. However, limit kicks with your (hopefully shoe-clad) foot to the knee or lower. Those high-flying kicks in the movies look dramatic, but aren’t suitable for those without years and years of training. The best result you can hope for in using a kick like that is the attacker will injure him-self while laughing hysterically at you.
If you are grabbed from behind, use your body weight. Just let your body go limp and fall. Odds are good your attacker isn’t expecting it and will struggle to maintain any type of grip on you. Once you hit the ground, roll away and get back to your feet.
If you manage to get your attacker onto the ground, a stomp to the head will probably make him realize his error in victim choice.
Your most powerful weapon, though, is your head. And I’m not referring to head-butts against the face, as effective as they might be. Self-defense means, first of all, using common sense to avoid confrontations if at all possible. Don’t look or act like a victim. Studies have shown people who walk with an air of confidence are much less likely to become assault victims.
Don’t walk around wearing the proverbial blinders. Be aware of your surroundings. Watch for potential threats and avoid them whenever possible.
Remember, there is no such thing as a fair fight. Do whatever it takes to win – defined here as being able to get away from your attacker and survive. And again, what you choose to do after getting some distance between the two of you is your decision to make based on the specific circumstances at that moment. When all is said and done, remember that it might be that your best course of action is to just hand over your wallet and let the guy run off. Money, credit cards, and phone numbers can all be replaced. Your life cannot.
Jim Cobb is a freelance writer, survivalist and licensed private investigator residing in the Upper Midwest. He is the owner of SurvivalWeekly.com. Jim can be contacted via email at: [email protected]
Legal Survival after Use of Deadly Force in Self Defense
by Marty Hayes, J.D.
I wager that most readers of this magazine own a gun of some sort, and probably more than one.
Logic dictates that gun ownership and developing skills in personal firearms use are among the very first steps a person would take to prepare for a large-scale crisis – from a Katrina-style natural disaster to a world-wide financial collapse.
Of course, if it’s necessary to use deadly force in self-defense during a world-changing event, being arrested and/or sued would likely not be a source of great concern. On the other hand, the legal aftermath of using lethal force in self-defense can be a crisis of significant magnitude, even without a world-changing catastrophe. Knowing how to survive that kind of crisis is a crucial dimension of preparedness.
First, you need to be familiar with the laws of your state regarding deadly force in self-defense. While we don’t have space to address the statutory and case law of every jurisdiction, there are common threads that will most likely be woven into your state’s specific laws.
There is uniform, nation-wide recognition of the right of armed Americans to use deadly force to protect their own lives and the lives of their families against the immediate threat of an unlawful lethal assault. That’s the easy part. The difficulty lies in the fact that your use of force will be judged against the “reasonable man” standard: Would a reasonable person, knowing what you knew at the time, have justifiably believed that he confronted an unlawful lethal assault? Just as importantly, would that hypothetical reasonable person have been likely to use deadly force to stop that assault? Was the force used to stop the assault “reasonable,” and not excessive?
To answer these questions, you must be able to articulate why you believed you were under a lethal attack, and why deadly force was necessary to stop it. This is best done by using the tried and true triad of the elements of Ability, Opportunity and Jeopardy. That framework has been used in training police officers (including myself) to recognize and respond to deadly force attacks for several generations.
The Elements of Ability-Opportunity-Jeopardy
Ability means the attacker was capable of causing your death or inflicting serious physical injury. Typically, that means he had a weapon, but it can also refer to overpowering strength of a single assailant, or the strength of numbers on the part of multiple assailants; in either case, you would confront a potentially fatal disparity of force. The question is this: Would a reasonable person believe the person or persons against whom you used deadly force possessed a weapon or an overpowering disparity of force?
Significantly, in a self-defense situation, the person shot doesn’t actually have to possess a weapon; all that is necessary is that the shooter reasonably believed he had one. This is illustrated by the acquittal of the four NYPD officers who shot Amadou Diallo on February 4, 1999, and were subsequently charged with murder. Diallo was shot after the four officers, who were in pursuit of a violent rapist, mistook him for the suspect. Diallo fled, and when he was cornered, he retrieved a black object from his back pocket. The officers mistakenly thought it was a gun, when it was actually only a wallet. This mistaken belief that Diallo was pulling a gun was sufficient to win an acquittal on the basis of self-defense.
The self-defense shooter also must demonstrate that the element of Opportunity was also present. This means that the attacker could have used his ability to cause death or grievous bodily harm, if he so desired. The presence of a firearm usually satisfies that condition. But what if the person is armed with a knife or other contact weapon? How close does a person have to be to place someone’s life in peril? The best answers are found in research done in the 1980s by Dennis Tueller, and carried on presently by the Police Policies Studies Council and the Force Science Research Center. Those findings are available on-line. At the risk of over-simplification, it boils down to this: A person attacking you with a contact weapon can close a distance of 20-30 feet – and inflict potentially deadly injury – within a space of 1.5 - 2.0 seconds. Do your own research, so you can articulate why you reasonably believed opportunity was present.
The third element in the triad is Jeopardy, which results when the person or persons attacking used their ability and opportunity to place a person’s life in immediate peril. Here, again, the “reasonable man” doctrine applies: Would a reasonable and prudent person, knowing what the defender knew at the time, believe that the attacker or attackers were either inflicting, or about to inflict, a life-threatening assault? Was the person’s life in jeopardy?
Complicating Factors
Justifying use of deadly force in self-defense is further complicated by requirements that actions taken must be reasonable and not excessive. In at least one state (my home state of Washington), the courts have decided that regardless of the statutory right to use deadly force against someone committing a statutorily defined felony, the defender must also be able to prove that deadly force was “reasonably” necessary to stop
the attack.
The reader needs to research the statutory law of his home state and then compare it against current case law to understand the whole picture. Even this might not cover all possibilities; amazingly, one could theoretically use deadly force in self-defense, abide by statutory and case law, and still be convicted and sent to jail because of a judge’s error, and only released if your conviction was overturned.
If the facts of your case do not clearly establish your innocence, you might create case law that changes your state’s prevailing legal doctrine regarding the use of deadly force in self-defense. The appellate court might look at the facts of your case and overturn its own previous case law, judging prior precedent to be outdated.
Further complicating an otherwise lawful use of deadly force in self-defense is the initial aggressor law, which prohibits introducing a claim of self-defense in court if you were the initial aggressor. If you first took the fight to the individual you ultimately ended up shooting, the judge at your trial may decide that because you were the initial aggressor, you can’t claim self-defense. Although I am not educated on every state’s laws, I’m not aware of a single state that does not have the initial aggressor concept as part of itself-defense case law. This doesn’t mean, however, that you always have to be Casper Milquetoast.
Many legitimate claims of self-defense arise from verbal arguments, road rage or other face-to-face confrontations. The initial aggressor rule doesn’t automatically mean you have to run away under all circumstances, but if you were the one who first took positive steps towards starting the altercation, you must do just that. If you started the fight, in order to claim self-defense you need to break off the altercation, retreat, and communicate your withdrawal from the fight. To what extent must you retreat? Once again, the “reasonable man” standard applies. Typically this means physical action along with verbal communication. Even you are the one who triggered a confrontation, if it becomes clear that you want no further part of the altercation and then your antagonist gives pursuit, he becomes the aggressor, and you can exercise your right to self-defense. Proving this can be somewhat challenging, especially if there are witnesses who tell police that you started the fight, and they didn’t see you withdraw.
Survivalist Anthologies Volume 1 Page 6