Getting Close (Feb 2017) was a post about:-
“Come whatever, you’ll eventually have to talk to other people.
People you don’t know, possibly armed, and their true intentions unknown.
I’ve come unstuck before doing this in past life and civilian security and as a consequence, I’m wary of ‘first contact’ with anyone.”
The last two articles Do you see an old man, and One squared away urban survivalist, talked about a more aggressive view to people.
Both were confrontational in nature but I prefer thinking like that because it keeps me wary. Wary is good because there is nowt as dangerous and unpredictable as the general public. Soldiers, LEO’s, and other ‘professionals’ have the benefit of training.
They all exhibit clearly discernible tells which telegraph their intentions, and while everyone does in some way, some civilians can be ‘difficult’ to interpret.
So where am I going?
On foot, In Transit, security and Situational Awareness i.e. Getting By are mentioned a lot in my scribbles.
That and profiling. Yeah, I know, how non politically correct is that?
BUT until the nice white guy in a pin striped suit starts body packing an IED, or the 101 year old white Christian granny pulls a gun on me . . .
Race, dress, military age, and language are all a profile triggers for me.
In “One squared away urban survivalist” I said:-
To show yourself will provoke an action if you are armed.
At best he’ll warn you, disarm you, and let you go.
At worst he’ll engage you on sight.
What if you weren’t openly armed.
Me thinking about my nice little blade concealed on my person.
At best he’ll control you, put you on the ground, and search you.
(If he’s got any sense he would but more about that later)
At worse he’ll just shoot.
Only how are they going to do that. Control, Search, and Disarm you?
After all it’s simpler to just put you down (BANG).
BUT, assuming they haven’t had a really bad day, the whole process of control, search and disarm DEMANDS that they act tactically gaining full control of your actions.
Don’t like that idea? Then don’t get seen!
Why would they act tactically when you could just be another survivor?
I’ve already mentioned that the general public are horribly unpredictable and I often make reference to an overwatch.
That’s the person or persons you won’t readily see but should have a very good view of you, AND, if armed, ‘sights on’ your movements and actions.
Remember. To anyone you meet, you are the one who is a direct threat.
It’s a two-way street people.
I know I’m toggling a lot here from a person (them) to you, he or she.
This is because the problem is not only yours but theirs.
You have to think both ways to stand a chance in what could quickly evolve into combat.
I would also like to mention a grey man’s thoughts on protocol.
Call it ‘being nice but careful’ in a time where street etiquette will used by all to avoid ‘misunderstandings’ when strangers meet or trade.
Only that will take time to ‘roll out’.
Until then it could be the Wild West for quite some time.
Wild West rules of engagement?
If he’s armed and twitches, shoot!
If he doesn’t twitch and he’s armed, shoot anyway!
Aw, sod it. Just shoot first and don’t miss!
I did say Wild West rules didn’t I?
Get where I’m coming from?
For the benefit of the civilian world, ‘most’ of the meat in the worlds army is trained in combat search techniques. Nothing much has changed there over the years.
Only not everyone in the world is, or has, served in the forces, law enforcement, or even personal security. So you may encounter preppers, survivalists, and just plain old citizens who just wouldn’t know how to conduct a controlled challenge, approach, search, and seizure. That makes them unpredictable.
Thus you MUST ASSUME that anyone you meet is a DIRECT THREAT.
That’s someone who can inflict harm upon you.
THAT’S WHY YOU MUST THINK AND ACT TACTICALLY!
Incidentally there is such a thing as an indirect threat.
That being described as someone or something who endangers you in some other way like locking an exit, blinding you with a torch, or blocking your view of a direct threat.
A bit of a mind game follows.
The kid on the mobile phone or radio alerting someone of your presence.
That’s an indirect threat. What are you going to do about it?
Remember ex-mil, the only ROE you’ve got to worry about now is those quaint little civilian laws. Or, if the Rule of law has collapsed forever:-
Ye-Ha, you get to make your own ones up!
Still a bit confused? Know what a human shield is (beyond what TV describes)?
It could be an armed man with his arm around a woman’s neck, her between you and him and no clear shot. What would you do as he is screaming at you to put down your gun or the woman gets it?
A little twist. If you did come across this scenario, how do you know the woman is at threat and not one of their own playing a stage part to get you to drop your weapon?
My mentor’s argument was ANYONE who endangers you in any way is a legitimate target.
I can just feel the moralists and lawyers bristle at that one.
Right, wrong, I’ve heard (and lived) both sides to the argument only you need to get past all the B.S.
Survival for me has always been about looking after me and my own.
That will probably be the same for you.
Only if you don’t act, or hesitate, and get maimed or killed.
Who is going to look after them?
OK, now lets talk practical.
The first person to see the other has the tactical advantage.
So the sensible use of available cover when moving MAY just earn you first sight.
Even if I gain first eyes on, and have the tactical advantage, should I use it?
Clearly we’re decision-making here and the reasoning is the danger from engaging.
Few can guarantee the result of combat, remember that.
For example, you might have the perfect ambush set up, and your gun only goes click, or the round was defective and only the cap goes off shoving the bullet just half way down the barrel, or you miss, or some really large toothed bug sinks its teeth into your groin right at the wrong time. There are loads of different things that can go wrong.
Some call them Murphy’s Laws. Take time to look at these.
To civilians they will read funny even if you don’t understand them.
The horrible bit is they are mainly based on experience aka real life.
Sometimes the sensible thing to do is let the danger pass.
There again, if you do, what’s to stop them getting first sight on you at a later date?
Do or die. Die if you do? Die if you don’t?
OK, what now.
The only safe challenge is one made from behind adequate cover, but with eyes on.
I’ll leave that to the next article about this subject.