Author: Todd Heaton

As a retired Police Lieutenant I share with my students when I would use deadly force to defend myself or my family.  I don’t shy away from these questions.  I make clear in my YouTube videos that there is a window of opportunity that opens and closes quickly.  I talk about the importance of going early within that window of opportunity; and why.  There are many and various aspects to understanding when to use deadly force against an unjust criminal aggressor and these aspects have much to do with the practical knowledge on the physical battlefield.  As you come to learn the underlying fundamental principles on the physical battlefield or how to actually win deadly force confrontations you learn what’s feasible or what is possible.  In this post I’m going to share with you how you can find relative peace when it comes to knowing when you should pull the trigger to stop an unjust criminal aggressor.  This post has much to do with the legal battlefield.  

How many battlefields are there?  At Humilitas First I teach essentially five battlefields.  I’ll list them in there order of importance:

1. Moral Battlefield – doing the right things according to God’s Divine Revelation.
2. Physical Battlefield – the fundamental principles that hold sway regarding winning or losing the fight.
3. Legal Battlefield – the fundamental legal principles that determine your freedom or incarceration in your particular state.
4. Civil Battlefield – the civil principles and protections that determine your financial stability or perhaps bankruptcy. 
5. Social Battlefield – we live in strange times is the best way I can sum this up for now.

From the beginning of my police career I understood and gave much attention to how to win on the physical battlefield as well as the legal battlefield.  Yes, the legal battlefield is a future battle for another day and the most pressing battlefield is the present physical battlefield but that legal battlefield day is still coming.  We don’t want to neglect the legal battlefield.  I used to keep a cheat sheet in my report book with the three prong test from Graham V Connor (1989) to be sure to document in my police report the following information:

1. The severity of the crime at issue (ie; forcible felony?)
2. Whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others?
3. Whether he was actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight?

Why am I sharing this with you?  Through study we can come to learn common pitfalls or legal errors that can and will land us in prison so that we can avoid those errors.  We can acquire the legal fundamentals we need to give us the highest probability of doing well on this future legal battlefield.  We need to learn and do the thinking on how to stack the odds regardless of what battlefield we find ourselves upon.  I absolutely did the thinking on the legal battlefield during my police career though increasingly that’s not enough as we see our criminal justice system under attack from the left.  

In many liberal counties we see activist prosecutors receiving Political Action Committee (PAC) funding for their campaigns.  We see activist prosecutors being elected to sit in District Attorney seats who then willingly turn a blind eye to many and various crimes and criminals. These same activist prosecutors simultaneously target innocent people of good will (like police officers) due to the prosecutor’s political agenda or world view. The Bible gives us a very accurate picture of what’s going on today in Deuteronomy chapter 28 verse 28 The LORD will smite you with madness and blindness and confusion of mind;   An activist prosecutor who suffers this fate does not limit their madness to stop at the feet of police officers but likewise begins to affect innocent citizens of good will.  I share this so that you understand as these conditions worsen you’ll have to be willing to make greater and greater exchanges in risks from one battlefield to the other.  To do the right ethical and moral thing (moral battlefield) you’ll have to be willing to take larger risks with the activist District Attorney (legal battlefield).  To win the deadly force physical confrontation (physical battlefield) you’ll have to be willing to take larger risks with the local activist District Attorney (legal battlefield).  In 2022, we’re living in a world that increasingly has begun calling good – evil and evil – good.  

There is no way in a short article, a video, or even a week long class that I can make you a craftsman on the legal battlefield.  There are many subtleties on the legal battlefield that have the power to change a justified use of deadly force into an unjustified use of deadly force.  There is just no way around the necessity of your willingness to commit your time and effort towards the goal of learning the underlying fundamental legal principles and then perhaps putting out and doing the extended work to become a craftsman on the legal battlefield.   A consistent and disciplined work ethic and time are all that is required for craftsmanship.

Some would say: Look man, I’ve taken the concealed carry course in my state and I know the legal principles.  Well, I’m a certified firearms instructor and I’m telling you it is highly improbable that in your one or two day course for concealed carry (which includes various other topics) that you have acquired a solid knowledge base regarding the underlying fundamental legal principles.  

Anytime I’m learning a new subject I often have questions that go to the heart of the subject matter.  I tend to sparingly ask some questions during a class but tend to save some of the more controversial harder questions for a one-on-one during a break.  After the course I’ll think of other questions that I forgot to ask.  That can be kind of frustrating.  

There’s an old adage that says “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.  Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.”  

As human beings we tend towards laziness.  In my experience grace most definitely can overcome the inertia needed to change that default state but then pride often tricks us into thinking we got this.    

So how do we know when we should use deadly force to stop an unjust criminal aggressor?  You have to do the work of learning the underlying fundamental legal principles!

After retiring from law enforcement the first thing I did in an attempt learn the subtle and sometimes not so subtle differences that exist between using force as a police officer to potentially using force as part of legitimate self-defense as a retired civilian was to look to Illinois case law. I systematically studied three dozen Illinois cases. Reading, re-reading, highlighting, annotating, and thinking about the lessons that could be gleaned from a claim of self-defense by a private citizen in the state of Illinois.  That took time and that took effort.  I sought to learn the underlying fundamental principles in my home state.

The next thing I did was to look for a craftsman who had written about or discussed the underlying fundamental legal principles on a larger scale.  This added the work of vetting the purported expert in order to find an actual craftsman.  Provided you have found a way to acquire some fundamental principles you then have to read or listen to that purported craftsman with an ear for discordant notes.  In other words errors, drips, or runs as one instructor used to say.   I found a craftsman in attorney Andrew Branca.  Mr. Branca has a book: The Law of Self Defense. He notes in his book there are five areas a prosecutor will attack in an attempt to convict you and send you to prison.  If a prosecutor is able to show  any one of the following five you end up in prison for an unjustified use of deadly force.  What are they?

1. Innocence: showing that you were not legally innocent but rather you engaged in what’s called mutual combat.
2. Imminence: showing the purported unjust aggressor’s threat lacked imminence. In Illinois we look for apparent threat (jeopardy) as well as the present ability and present opportunity for imminence.
3. Proportionality: your use of force was not in proportion to the threat you were facing.  An example would be you’re facing a threat that a reasonable person in your situation would believe is not lethal and yet you resort to a lethal level of force.
4. Avoidance: even in a stand your ground state this principle is a great principle for both the legal battlefield as well as the physical battlefield.*  
5. Reasonableness: both subjective and objective.  

*Reach out today and schedule training with Humilitas First and I’ll teach you how and why being able to show avoidance is a winning strategy on both the physical and legal battlefields.

In my courses I recommend students buy the book The Law of Self Defense by Andrew Branca.  Reading and comprehending this book is a great first step at acquiring the underlying fundamental legal principles. You may still be able to obtain a free copy (I think you have to pay shipping) of his book on his website at https://lawofselfdefense.com/.  I recommend subscribing to any email notification lists Mr. Branca may have as well as any of his YouTube channels.  Never before in the history of our nation has it been as important as it is today to do the work necessary to come to a solid understanding of the underlying fundamental legal principles. Get started today!

Do tactics change?  Yes.  Depending upon things like terrain, circumstances, and our adversary’s ability to adapt his Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP).  You have to watch your adversary so that you can figure him out. What’s typical in an unjust aggressors robbery, vehicular hijacking, or home invasion? As an unjust criminal aggressor adapts his TTP’s you then must improvise, adapt, and overcome these by tweaking your own TTP’s.  

In a recent tactical breakdown I did on YouTube we see and hear a common sight today – police officers stuck in a Goofy Loop;  ‘Put the knife down.  Put the knife down.  Put the knife down.  Put the knife down.  Put the knife down!’  That’s a Goofy Loop. Goofy loops are abdications of one’s decision to protect over to the unjust aggressor to permit him to decide potentially who lives and who dies. There are many and various reasons for this today but a big one is politics.

Criminals observe example after example of Goofy Loops on the nightly news. It is so common today that bad guys have become conditioned to expect this.  Thinking in terms of the late John Boyd’s OODA Loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) a criminal’s orientation becomes formed to the idea they’ll receive a lot of warnings. They develop a kind of entitlement mindset expecting to have police point firearms at them and to receive endless warnings in the same way a permissive parent speaks to a badly behaved child.  Permissive parents likewise provide numerous warnings that if the bad behavior doesn’t immediately cease then that child will suffer the consequences.  However the consequences and accountability never actually happen.

Here’s a short clip from the video where I’ll show you the unjust criminal aggressor’s lack of reaction to having the police point a firearm at him.  The expectation is there will be more warnings.  Two seconds is plenty of time for a defender (in this video the police) to stop the threat. I also draw a line from where I believe the officer’s dominant eye-line is and this shows the officer looking over his sights at the high ready position.  Why is that important?  In my opinion it shows the officer’s decision is to continue to monitor while giving warnings (which is precisely what he does) rather than begin actually defending the grandfather by shooting the unjust aggressor to stop his already escalated imminent threat of great bodily harm or death.

Typically an unjust criminal aggressor who has come to expect numerous warnings doesn’t expect a defender to immediately begin shooting.  Where this expectation exists the defender has an advantage. 

What’s the advantage? The unjust aggressor’s expectation (more warnings) means the defender has the element of surprise.  Surprise, speed, and violence of action are underlying fundamental principles as it relates to tactics.  Action beats reaction is another underlying fundamental principle.  Underlying fundamental principles don’t change; they are like the bed of a river.  Think of a river bed like a solid rock bed which lies beneath the river.  That solid rock bed remains the same – no change. We know over time the appearance at the surface level or the shape of a river or stream does change due to things like erosion, deposition, and transport of sediment.1  You could think of this like the flow of a river.  The level and speed of that flow can vary depending upon rains or drought.  When it comes to tactics they will change frequently as the enemy reacts to and adapts especially to losses.  In other words your enemies watch how you solve violent problems and eventually they’ll figure you out.  Unjust criminal aggressors adapt and then innocent people of good will must improvise, adapt, and overcome.  Back and forth adversaries go in effort to dominate and secure victory. 

Below is a short excerpt from an older video of retired USMC General James “Mad Dog” Mattis where he synthesizes three things he’s learned over thirty five years with the United States Marine Corps:

1) https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/rivers-and-streams-water-and-26405398/

“Why, then, do you fear to take up the cross when through it you can win a kingdom? In the cross is salvation, in the cross is life, in the cross is protection from enemies, in the cross is infusion of heavenly sweetness, in the cross is strength of mind, in the cross is joy of spirit, in the cross is highest virtue, in the cross is perfect holiness. There is no salvation of soul nor hope of everlasting life but in the cross.”

The Imitation of Christ by Thomas À Kempis

I wish someone would have told me as a young sheep dog; In everything you do; strive to remain calm and think your way through the combat.  Learn to detach from all the fears that will swirl about that big ugly head of yours.

We have an untold number of opportunities every single day to practice detachment from this, that, and the other fear.  As Thomas Kempis taught; in the Cross is strength of mind.

If an ambush predator were to unlawfully grab hold of and restrain you, you’re going to want to have a default aggressive response to that kind of a violent problem.  Perfect practice can build in this kind of trained response.  While visiting, stopping, and moving about public spaces a strong bearing does have the potential to discourage some unjust criminal aggressors from choosing us as a target. Bearing has to do with how you carry yourself.  Merriam-Webster in part states “a man of erect and soldierly bearing” and also; “an examination or determination of one’s position or situation.”  In this post I’ll dig down, a little, regarding bearing and default aggressive responses.  On my YouTube channel I recently broke down a robbery and violent head stomping with the same title as this post. You can see that video at this link:

First An Important Distinction:

Comporting yourself with a strong bearing comes before a potentially dangerous situation begins to develop.  After a potential threat begins to develop if I have distance and time I’m either avoiding and/or I’m moving offline leading my adversary out to a place of disadvantage or vulnerability.  Humility involves taking the lowest seat.  The exercise of the virtue of humility is humiliation. Where time and distance permit I coach students to move offline with their adversary at roughly a 90° angle towards cover or concealment (some object).  If the bad guy pursues then ambiguity decreases and jeopardy increases (think legal battlefield).  I teach students how to use a near pass with their desired destination then pivot 90° at the apex point gaining surprise!  The surprise that the innocent person of goodwill just secured cover and now they’re an exceedingly small target should this confrontation go to guns.  Often posturing down rather than up has the power to lead one’s adversary out to the deep.   Seeing early and moving offline early is critical to such a strategy.   Where distance and time do not permit there are other tactics and strategies beyond the scope of this post.

Avoiding violent problems begins with good situational awareness.  A really good analogy is defensive driving.  As drivers gain experience their capability to rapidly read, understand, and act, gets better, as it relates to dealing with other incompetent, distracted, or dangerous drivers.  Good defensive drivers read things a lot farther out.  Situational awareness works in much the same way.

In law enforcement, bearing was also referred to as officer presence or command presence. This concept began with a squared away uniform.  Fitness and strength were considered part of good officer presence.  A command voice, readiness, and a resolute will as is proven out through one’s actions.  So what might readiness and the body language of readiness look like?  The head and eyes are up paying attention. Priority of attention is paid to understanding what it is you’re seeing, and remaining watchful without spinning up a confrontation.  Before a threat exists you might use peripheral vision, obscured views through tinted windows, sunglasses, and/or reflections to subtly monitor potential threats.   As threats close with or compress in on you and yours, direct focus on the hands becomes a priority.  Potential threats are not easily nor quickly rationalized away – they are monitored.  Potential unjust aggressors are not given a position of advantage out of some misplaced social norm or courtesy. Shoulders are typically pulled back juxtaposed to slouched or rolled forward.  As you stand, walk, and move about an observer might describe what they see as seeing someone who knows where they are; and knows where they’re going, with what might be described as an air of confidence.  The bottom line is you do not appear confused or uncertain.  Stability and mobility come from stance.  In my estimation a good stance is not having your feet exceedingly close together but more like shoulder width and offset to some degree.  Overall alignment or orientation demonstrates a correct positioning facing generally towards the biggest potential threat(s) moving around you and yours.  

Over the course of my life, I have heard many times from folks who did not serve in a warrior profession comment about how they could just tell a police officer was in law enforcement.  The comments often are not meant as a compliment. Additional comments may include the belief that the guy is cocky or arrogant.  Both good guys and bad guys often display a similar kind of air of confidence, which in part explains how both  good guys and bad guys often recognize each other as they move about society.  There are some other tell-tale signs whether we’re seeing a good guy or bad guy though that’s a discussion for another day. There have been times I have found myself wondering: What am I looking at here?  Is this a good guy or a bad guy?  

So long as you or I are willing to dominate the bad & ugly parts of our ego we can avoid some (not all) potentially violent confrontations. So long as you or I are willing to dominate the bad & ugly parts of our ego we can often stack winning principles putting ourselves in the best possible positions to decisively win a violent confrontation.

When my family is with me I’m only as fast as my slowest members and because my family is with me, it’s not about me and my escape or survival, it’s about their escape and survival. That is the coin of the realm for a husband, father, or mother.  That is the coin of the realm for a brother in arms – a protector and defender of innocents.  That is the coin of the realm for any sheepdog or shepherd, as it were.

Where an unjust criminal aggressor perceives or reads you as an easy victim the least expected thing will be for you to immediately move into, through, and over your unjust aggressor with surprise, speed, and violence of action. Continuing to attempt to flee when fleeing is not an option gives the bad guy a higher percentage of probability of dominating and perhaps ending your life.  A default aggressive response moves that percentage of probability immediately closer to 50/50.  Where it’s not possible for me to stack probabilities my way sometimes we have to accept the best odds we may have is 50/50.  Part of that reality includes our will – which is the decision making faculty of our souls.  Understand unless the unjust aggressor immediately incapacitates us via paralysis, unconsciousness, dying or death we still have some number of seconds to STOP the unjust aggressor.  We cannot know with certainty whether the bad guy’s bullet or knife wound will or will not result in our eventual death.  We might think we know and perhaps we are right but the immediate decision that must be made is; What do you do with the time you’ve been given?  Perhaps it’s only thirty seven more seconds!  Perhaps it’s only twelve more seconds.  What – do you do – with the time?  If you want any chance to live out the rest of your natural life you first must stop – the – threat!  Use whatever time you have to win the fight, leaving the business of your life or death up to the good Lord.

To conclude this business isn’t merely about appearing competent, confident, and prepared. Rather it’s about being competent, confident, and prepared.  It’s not about posturing up which may facilitate an early grave or a lengthy stay in your local prison.  When a threat is undeterred by a strong and confident bearing it’s often a winning strategy to posture down and sandbag buying you the element of surprise.  Sandbagging can cause a bad guy to underestimate you and in his own prideful overconfidence begin giving you opportunities to gain advantages in positioning, timing (think initiative), and in the will.  Surprise when coupled with speed and violence of action may facilitate achieving and maintaining relative superiority to secure the win.  The principles, tactics, and strategies that work do so for both the good and the bad men and women of this world.  The critical moral and legal questions then come down to what was the will of each man.  In the video example above the will of the unjust aggressor was domination, incapacitation, and robbery.  Innocent people have the will to protect and defend against such immoral, unethical, and illegal attacks.  Begin by seeking to acquire knowledge relating to fundamental principles of building a solid foundation, then seek to answer the questions; do I have a legitimate potentially violent problem, and if yes,  what do I do about that problem?  

Think about these things. 

As a general rule it’s not a good idea to attempt to draw on a drawn gun, especially at point-blank range, contact range, and all the more when an unjust aggressor is already pointing his firearm at you. In this blog post I’ll take a look at some of what it depends upon.  I’ll dig down a bit on the question of when it may make sense to attempt to draw on a drawn gun or from what’s been called drawing from the drop (meaning the bad guy is pointing his firearm at you), and you remain under his observation or peripheral vision.

Where no good opportunity exists and a criminal demands my wallet, or my car, by brandishing or pointing a firearm at me or mine, I’m going to comply and hand those things over. I’m going to be a good witness. If I decide to use legitimate defense it will be due to the imminent threat of great bodily harm, or death, not because of a loss of a material good. Part of that decision process will include remaining watchful for a window of opportunity or one of the other circumstances listed below.

If a bad guy has a readiness, close distance, and the will to unjustly murder an innocent any sudden reaches for a concealed weapon will likely result in you experiencing great bodily harm, or death. Let’s take a look at an instance where I do not believe the bad guy had a readiness which had much to do with his expectations:

If an unjust criminal aggressor gives us the gift of underestimation, we ought to be grateful for that gift. We ought to exploit and take advantage of any errors or vulnerabilities to stop the unjust imminent deadly force threat! Sandbagging (taking the lowest seat – humbling oneself) facilitates an adversary’s belief that they will receive no resistance what-so-ever. That belief sometimes opens a window of opportunity! This is not a sporting event with rules, referee’s, nor paramedics standing by. These are grave matters of life and death! If an imminent threat of great bodily harm or death finds me then the last thing I want is a fair fight. I want to stack winning principles my way.

In general the closer you are to an unjust ambush criminal predator the higher the probability that a gunfight with him results in your death. The closer you are the more important it is to seize initiative and decisively win the fight. At contact range (inside 1 yard) you either comply, immobilize his weapon or him (draw and end the fight), or create distance. At this distance it’s just too easy for the bad guy to simply raise his firearm and let your head fill the backdrop of his slide, or muzzle.  If you’re able to immobilize your adversary’s weapon or pin him against something facing away from you, do so. Think in terms of a brief immobilization, only long enough to draw and solve your deadly threat problem? Deadly force encounters are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. Expect a moment of immobilization to be brief (like cover; which is also temporary when someone flanks or gets behind you).

Professional training teaches students to achieve sight alignment and then sight picture. For those using a red dot on their weapon system like an RMR (Ruggedized Miniature Reflex), the sight alignment is built in and one only needs sight picture.

What about point-blank range?  Point-blank range is roughly 1-3 yards.  This is the distance where if he has the will to dig in and fight we ought to expect to take damage (meaning we will be shot; probably repeatedly).  As we increase the distance beyond point blank range then it depends upon our adversary’s skill level.  Most street level bad guys do not have professional firearms training so shooting one handed without sight alignment means as distances increase there is an increased probability of missing their target.  If a bad guy holds his firearm with a proper two handed grip – that’s a clue you’re going to need a lot more distance (providing your skill levels can accommodate) or quick access to cover which means you get small behind that cover (as his target) while he remains large (as your target).

I can’t know anyone’s will by merely looking at them. Posturing is not the same thing as a person’s will. Likewise, sandbagging doesn’t mean a person doesn’t have the will to end me or mine. The will gets proven out in the combat.

Some might question if action beats reaction (and it does) then why not engage the deadly force threat? The principle of action beating reaction involves a very short window of time. Yes, action beats reaction though it is measured in fractions of a second. From studying deadly force confrontations when a person is expecting an action I’ve observed a reaction time as low as four tenths of a second. When a person is surprised we may see seven tenths of a second, and often we see a reaction of flight among bad actors to save oneself and get out of Dodge City. Initiative is critical in deadly force confrontations. But initiative must be balanced with opportunity. Innocents ought to remain watchful for the best timing to launch a counter defense (to strike) with surprise, speed, and violence of action!

When might I choose to draw on a drawn gun? 

#1  If the unjust criminal aggressor goes active!  Meaning the bad guy begins actively shooting, stabbing, or clubbing me, mine, or innocents. This is first in order because the time of deciding has ended and now a new clock has started ticking.  If you ignore his deadly attack and just hope he’ll have mercy on you, very soon you will no longer be able to stop his attack.  People can, do, and have lived after being shot or stabbed multiple times.  Does that mean you’re going to live?  There are no guarantees! However, failing to focus on stopping the threat increases the probability that he will end you.  Don’t look for mercy from an unjust criminal aggressor dealing out deadly blows. The only question you must now decide is; if you only have 19 seconds left on this earth what are you going to do with that time?  Stop the threat!  How?  Immediately and in as much as you can simultaneously move, draw, present, and shoot; repeatedly until the threat is eliminated or he shows clear and convincing signs of full surrender.  How do I define eliminating a threat? By driving the threat bearer down into incapacitation or a physiological stoppage.  Incapacitation means he’s paralyzed, unconscious, dying, or dead.  This is about removing the unjust aggressor’s will. The dying and dead part ultimately is God’s business not mine.  If the unjust criminal aggressor voluntarily decides to stop, which is called a psychological stoppage at any point prior to the physiological stoppage then I would stop!  Full stop as fast as is humanly possible.  

#2 If I believe the unjust criminal aggressor is about to go active! Circumstances go from sketchy to terrifying all within milliseconds to just a second or two. As you are reading or perceiving the developing situation you may not be able in that moment to fully understand nor articulate why and how you just knew a failure to act decisively means probable great bodily harm or death. In Gavin de Becker’s book The Gift of Fear there is an example of a woman who reported she knew if she didn’t escape she would be murdered. Later she was able to go back through the events and do the thinking and as she recalled step by step the bad guy’s actions she realized when he shut the window and turned up the stereo those were signs he was preparing to cover any screams as he went to the kitchen to obtain a knife. She later understood and could articulate how she just knew she would be murdered if she did not escape.

There are other legal factors that will later be challenged on the legal battlefield. Five factors include innocence, imminence, proportionality, avoidance, and reasonableness (both objective and subjective). A high number of unjust aggressors don’t worry so much about legal, civil, and social battlefields. They don’t worry about moral battlefields. They focus on the physical battlefield. The time for preparing for all of these other battlefields is beforehand. Do the thinking (and practice) beforehand so that in the moment you have developed a trained response knowing where all the lines are on the moral, legal, civil, and social battlefields. When a fight cannot be avoided you need to focus on winning the physical battlefield.

Some people refer to this kind of belief as following your gut.  In law enforcement sometimes we’d mention a kind of sixth senseⁱ, intuition, or instinct where an officer might have a bad feeling about someone or some developing situation. Those who work, live, and kind of soak in exceedingly dangerous areas often develop an ability to perceive or read people and situations very quickly. Part of that might include non-verbal cues in facial or body language, positioning, and timing which add up to signs that we’d read sometimes faster than we might be able to fully understand or articulate.

I’ve written before in this Blog about my trust in my Guardian Angel. Catholics who have studied their Faith or listened to sound preaching will immediately get this. Catholics believe in the existence and activity of angels both good and fallen. Angels are messengers. If you’re Catholic and you haven’t ever heard this a bare bones beginning is the Catechism of the Catholic Church; #325-#354. I’m not going to dig down on explaining this. For my part, I believe.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter how or why you believe this person is about to go active because the context is an unjust aggressor is presenting an imminent threat of great bodily harm, or death via that firearm he’s reaching for, pulled, brandished, or pointed. Once that kind of threat exists, if I believe this guy is about to go active I’m not required to gamble even one tenth of one percent with my life or the life of someone I purport to love. That leads into the next reason.

#3 If the unjust criminal aggressor gives me a blind spot!  

If the unjust aggressor temporarily becomes distracted and while the threat is active and ongoing, he turns his back towards me giving me a blind spot OR ANY OTHER VULNERABILITY that might be exploited. Some would say: Unfair!  Unfair!  A great working definition for the word tactics is to gain an advantage in positioning, timing, and / or over the will of our adversary.  So what kind of advantage do you imagine we’re talking about?  If you guessed an “unfair advantage” you’d be correct.  This is why I sometimes write or coach that as part of legitimate defense one must be willing to do that next right hard and seemingly “dirty” thing.  Seemingly is a qualifying term.  It seems dirty because it’s unfair.  It’s not dirty! If you’re an innocent person of goodwill, gaining an unfair advantage to legitimately defend your life or the life of someone you purport to love is good, right, and just. This ain’t no game!  This is not a sport! This is a matter of life or death.  Common sense seems to be in short supply these days. It is common sense that an unjust criminal aggressor using the threat of death to gain his immoral, unethical, and illegal will (meaning his desires) has no moral, ethical, or legal rights to do so!

I have to make a distinction here.  What this does not mean is revenge or vengeance.  If an unjust criminal takes my wallet immediately, turns and begins running from the crime scene I’m going to be a good witness.  If once the threat is inactive or no longer ongoing I take up a sound two handed shooting grip and stance, and begin shooting down the road in the interest of revenge then I’m going to have a moral problem with God and a legal problem with the state. 

It is quite another thing to take advantage of a vulnerability, a poor tactic, or a bungleⁱⁱ, in positioning or timing (readiness) when their will to continue the deadly threat remains undeterred.  All that is required to stop this series of tragic events is a change in their will – a clear and convincing sign of full reversal of their deadly force threat!   If an unjust aggressor gives me his back or any other vulnerability this is a reason I might choose to exploit that vulnerability.  Do not wait until your adversary is quite ready or better positioned.  Where an unjust criminal aggressor presents an active and ongoing imminent deadly force threat (ie; he’s not fleeing the scene), innocent people of goodwill are not burdened with gambling with their own or they’re loved one’s life. 

#4 If this is a kidnapping type event!  

If an unjust criminal aggressor says; Get in the car!  Walk towards the trees! Move to the back room! Drive! The second crime scene is often a place of torture, rape, and death. With this circumstance I may look for a natural transition or I may attempt to create a transition by temporarily turning my body in such a way to give me a degree of surreptitious drawing. Transitions are inherently dangerous for everyone involved. If you learn to recognize natural transitions these are little windows of opportunity. Transitions are places where Mr. Murphy sometimes shows up and creates havoc (Murphy’s Law: if something can go wrong it will go wrong).  I might drop something and bend at the waist to pick it up to give me a chance at a surreptitious draw.  I might turn my body in such a way as to give myself the best chance for a surreptitious draw. I might fake a heart attack for the same reason. Whether the unjust criminal aggressor has buy in (meaning you acquire some degree of surprise) or not, once you go for your weapon system then it’s speed, and violence of action until the threat is eliminated or you enter eternity. Just like the unjust criminal aggressors of this world every man (or woman) has to decide what they do with the time that they’ve been given?

In conclusion, there are times where we may have to draw on a drawn gun or even worse from the drop. As it relates to tactics, strategy, and logistics, do the thinking beforehand.

i Sixth sense: a power of perception like but not one of the five senses : a special ability to perceive or comprehend : a keen intuitive power

ii Bungle: to do, make, perform, or handle clumsily or badly : MISHANDLE, BOTCH