Category: Uncategorized

The late Col. John Boyd USAF, gave the world the O-O-D-A Loop. In Robert Coram’s book Boyd the Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Coram writes:

“The OODA Loop is often seen as a simple one-dimensional cycle, where one observes what the enemy is doing, becomes oriented to the enemy action, makes a decision, and then takes an action. This “dumbing down” of a highly complex concept is especially prevalent in the military, where only the explicit part of the Loop is understood.¹”

O-O-D-A stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, & Act. Growing up in Law Enforcement which is a quasi military organization, I have learned through experience simple and aggressive are often – a – winning – combination. Under stress we want to keep things simple, perhaps even “dumb things down” a bit. When we’re not under stress then we ought to set about learning that body of knowledge which makes the OODA Loop a bit more complex. Coram goes on to say:

“The key thing to understand about Boyd’s version is not the mechanical cycle itself, but rather the need to execute the cycle in such fashion as to get inside the mind and the decision cycle of the adversary. This means the adversary is dealing with outdated or irrelevant information and thus becomes confused and disoriented and can’t function.²”

I agree with Coram on disrupting the enemy’s mind and again through experience I have learned it comes down to a mans “will.” The adversary always gets a vote. When it cannot be avoided or escaped for a variety of reasons then an innocent defender must forcibly remove the adversary’s hope, his will to continue attacking, or his capacity to continue attacking. By achieving and maintaining relative superiority an adversary rapidly experiences discouragement, giving way to despondency, and despair. Those all have to do with hope. When the unjust aggressor presents a deadly force threat an innocent may achieve this via means of lethal defensive blows oriented towards bringing about a physiological stoppage. If the unjust aggressor should suffer a psychological stoppage meaning he gives up (despair), stops, or flees, then the innocent stop delivering lethal blows. No more lethal blows. What might that look like? He purposely drops the gun, knife, or blunt weapon, and ceases his attack. This is not and cannot be about vengeance. The last Coram excerpt for this post;

“Even Boyd’s acolytes³do not always agree on what Boyd meant with the OODA Loop.⁴”

I had to look up the word acolyte to figure out it means follower. This problem solving model (that’s what I’m calling it) applies to far more than the topic of legitimate defense of self or others. So if this is a problem solving model, what’s the problem? In legitimate self-defense or defense of others, it’s an unjust aggressor presenting a threat of bodily harm (less than lethal force), great bodily harm (lethal force in Illinois), or death to innocents.

We first have to observe something that concerns us – a potential threat. Then we have to orient (analyze and correctly understand) whether it is a legitimate threat, something requiring more observation & maneuver to avoid, or nothing to worry about at all. Boyd’s work concerning orientation revealed cultural traditions, genetic heritage, new information, previous experiences, and analysis and synthesis all factoring into how a person is going to perceive what they see. Boyd also believed these parts are interconnected. I would add they compenetrate⁵ one another. Meaning pervade or penetrate throughout. I see Boyd’s cultural traditions and genetic heritage as what I call a persons filter. The filter being the sum total of a persons upbringing, education, religious beliefs (or not), training, and experiences. Their philosophy or world views. All of these have a part to play in how a person perceives what they observe. The important thing to note is by education and training we can build in a trained response. When stressed we often default to our level of training or that trained response. Experience quite literally convinces a man. Experience often raises a mans propensity for violence.

“Experience: that most brutal of teachers…” ― C.S. Lewis

I can attest to the fact that experience will change your mind, providing you live through it. If you believe all people are basically good and that you can trust in everyone’s mercy when the chips are down – you error, you error.

Is there a gap in the orientation stage between reality and a persons perception of reality? A persons perception can be right or it can be wrong. A particular person might buy into things like political correctness or false compassion for robbers, rapists, and murderers. Those errors are going to need to be educated and trained out of that individual so that they observe, orient, decide, and act based upon sound principles and not some social construct that inspires fear, hesitation, and a loss of innocent life. The orientation stage will interconnect with the observation stage as a persons filter has it’s way with a persons perception. The orientation stage will interconnect with the decision making stage as the persons decides correctly or incorrectly based upon their perception. The orientation stage primarily has to do with knowledge. Education, training, and experience can forever alter how we deal with particular problems. Where there is a breakdown in any of these stages things can begin to unravel and as we go through a succession of Loops the end result can be a tragedy. Saint Thomas Aquinas said: An error in the beginning is an error indeed. That’s because the error compounds. That is why it’s more important we get orientation right in the beginning. We can have all the skills in the world and they’ll do us no good if we haven’t yet addressed and dwelt with questions or problems having to do with our perceptions. All of the factors Boyd identified in the orientation stage will impact the decision making stage. We tend to think of just one loop. There are often many loops. We’re going through the loops as well as those around us. Think about how this would apply to something like defensive driving. In defensive driving we’re constantly observing, orienting, deciding, and acting. We’re analyzing and we’re synthesizing changing conditions and new information. Our past driving experiences influence our perception, decisions, and actions. It’s not just one loop! It’s not just one decision! Sometimes multiple decisions come at us at the same time. Then have to prioritize what decision has to be made now and act on that decision. Are we making sound decisions or are we beginning to stack errors? What was a persons training like? Was formation based upon first principles? Was a trained response built in? The real work for preparing a person to make good decisions comes during formation in the orientation stage. It comes from proper education, training, and depending on the line of work experience. The act stage has much to do with skills. This stage also has much to do with the application of the body of knowledge purportedly learned during the orientation stage. Can we put all that together? Can we make it happen, as it were? How competent are we at all that tactical knowledge we ought to have learned during our formation? Do we continue to strive to learn as a student? Do we care enough to learn our craft? Do we care enough to do the work to become a craftsman? The orientation stage has much to do with growing in these competencies. The action stage is where we have to begin applying these things. Nothing less than perfect practice, right? How are our firearms skills? Have we correctly prioritized the four safety rules and then sought out scenario based training to pressure test these safety skills? Can we move and administratively handle a firearm safely for the benefit of any and all innocents nearby? An emphasis ought to be placed on this aspect of firearms handling. The goal is to defend the innocents we’re gravely responsible to protect. We ought to place more of an emphasis on the four safety rules. On a live square range do we have an ability to get our gun working and keep our gun working? Have we grown in competency as it relates to marksmanship? Have we advanced in competency to a combat style of shooting? Some public and private ranges may not permit this type of skill building. Have we continued advancing as it relates to drawing and shooting? Many ranges will not permit drawing from a holster. Do we have an ability to keep the firearm working, meaning have we been educated, trained, and had an opportunity to practice malfunction drills? Have we received education, training, and an opportunity to practice speed loads and tactical loads?

We can begin to see Coram’s assertion that this problem solving model is highly complex. Yet in managing or dealing with unjust aggressors it’s good to keep things simple. So we have to learn all of these things, practice perfectly, grow in wisdom and then strive to keep things simple.

It’s my understanding Boyd believed, the orientation stage was the most important stage. I hope I helped you to see above how and why that is a true statement. If we fail to orient correctly then we’re not going to make right decisions. Going through the OODA Loop at a faster tempo doesn’t really matter if we’re arriving at bad decisions. If the right decision is to shoot an unjust aggressor in defense of self or others, and I come to a conclusion other than that, then I and my people may suffer great bodily harm, or death.

Additionally, there are exchanges that must be considered. There is the moral battlefield which in my opinion is the most important of all the battlefields. Did we do the right thing before God? There’s the physical battlefield – did we consider subject factors, timing, and positioning to name just a few concerns as it relates to winning the physical fight? There’s the legal battlefield which increasingly today seems to be in direct conflict with itself and with the moral and physical fundamental principles of legitimate self-defense. Due to activist prosecutors the legal battlefield seems to be at war with it’s own precedent⁶ and jurisprudence⁷. Police and innocent citizens may get indicted unjustly, and even lose their freedom. There’s the civil battlefield – where police and innocent citizens may be litigated into bankruptcy. There is the social battlefield – some special interest group may bear down with an unjust pressure of physical threats, a burning, and destroying. The truth is we have to weigh these things and we must be willing to make exchanges as it relates to risks from one battlefield to another. Sometimes we have to assume higher risks on a particular battlefield so that we might still do that next right thing. The orientation stage includes a large body of knowledge. You cannot and will not, learn that body of knowledge in a 16 hour introductory level course for concealed carry. That is a bare bones introduction. I have identified twelve fundamental principles that I believe are critical to that body of knowledge. Some of these principles contain more than one subject matter and additional principles are contained within. These principles interconnect and compenetrate:

1. Leadership
2. Mindset
3. Problem Solving
4. Jeopardy Testing
5. Threat Awareness
6. Tactical Staging
7. Time, Distance, Cover (concealment)
8. Giving Loud Rebuke
9. Relative Superiority
10. Surprise, Speed, Violence of Action
11. Action Beats Reaction
12. Throttle Control

John Lovell of the Warrior Poet Society, former Army Ranger and professional trainer once gave what I consider a very good working definition of tactics. As I recall he said: Tactics are to gain an advantage in timing, positioning, or psychology. If what he meant by psychology was to gain a tactical advantage over the “will,” of an enemy then that’s the best working definition of tactics I’ve ever heard.

For those who lack knowledge, training, or experience in violence, things will most likely breakdown during the orientation stage, of the O-O-D-A Loop. Why? They can’t give what they don’t have – nemo dat quod non habet meaning no man gives what he does not have. They may see a threat but not perceive it as a threat. They may see a threat, perceive it correctly, though not know what to do about it and freeze. A goofy loop is when a person repeats the same thing over and over seemingly expecting a different result. That’s not a good a plan. I was first introduced to the term goofy loop which came out of a book called Training at the Speed of Life, Volume 1, by Kenneth Murray. For the untrained citizen a goofy loop may sound a lot like pleading; Please don’t kill me. Please, I have children. Please, I’m begging you. No, don’t do it, don’t do it…

For a trained police officer things are going to break down during the decision making stage, of the O-O-D-A Loop. With police officers you’ll hear something like: Drop it! Drop the gun! Drop it right now! I’m not telling you again! Put it down! Put the gun down! That’s a goofy loop. It’s far less likely a police officer will experience a break down in the orientation stage of the OODA Loop due to their training and experience. It could happen, with poor training, or complacency, or a really good ambush sunk in deep. However it is far more likely to occur during the decision making stage. Why? Fear. Fear is at the root of a break down in the decision making stage of an OODA Loop. Fears often flows forth from bad leadership. That may come from the top boss of your organization or it may come from outside; say from an activist local states attorney. It may come from some other politician having influence and the means. For instance say a governor who uses his attorney general and his state police when local authorities deem a case of self-defense to be justified. There are many and various politicians acting unjustly in these dark and crazy days. Many have begun to call good – evil, and call evil – good. Bad or improper training also flows forth from a crisis in leadership. Now-a-days officers have to fear being charged with a crime even when acting rightly in the best interest of innocent citizens, innocent brothers or sisters in arms, and also out of self defense for their own life. Why? Activist local prosecutors who have clogged up filters, as it were. Activist politicians bowing down to the false idols of political correctness. A false compassion or false pity for robbers, rapists, and murderers. We have a crisis of leadership today.

The decision stage will often involve many little decisions. There are often many OODA Loops occurring for all parties involved in a violent confrontation. We want to avoid stacking errors.

The act stage reveals whether you can apply or make happen all that knowledge base gained in studying and building in the trained responses learned in that body of knowledge during your education, training, and experiences – in other words your analysis and synthesis of the orientation stage. Skills matter. This is where we begin to find out through well scripted scenario based training under some artificial pressure (stress inoculation) where the deficiencies are. Or where you might shine. Vetting then getting to work strengthening your weaknesses.

Boyd found that his enemy’s desire to defeat him could be used to lead his enemy into a position of disadvantage. Bill Whittle wrote this regarding John Boyd:

“In the mid to late fifties, a fighter pilot could earn himself a quick forty bucks and perhaps a nice steak dinner in Vegas – not to mention everlasting renown, which is to fighter pilots what oxygen is to us lesser beings – by meeting over the Green Spot at thirty thousand feet and taking position just 500 feet behind an arrogant and unpleasant man with precisely zero air-to-air victories to his credit. From that perfect kill position, you would yell “Fight’s on!” and if that sitting duck in front of you was not on your tail with you in his gun sight in forty seconds flat then you would win the money, the dinner and best of all, the fame. …And yet that forty dollars went uncollected, uncollected for many years against scores of the best fighter pilots in the world. ”

How might that apply in a concealed carry situation? Early on you see a potential threat compressing time and distance with you. So you maneuver away from that threat towards cover. Cover is simply defined as something that will stop bullets. Gaining cover is to gain a position of advantage. If the threat is lethal then we’re going to lean out so that all the unjust aggressor see’s is a slice of our face, our dominant eye, and the muzzle of our firearm. He now finds himself in a place he doesn’t want to be. You crossed an expanse making it to cover. He didn’t make it to cover. He’s big, meaning his whole body is subject to receiving incoming rounds. You’re small, meaning he only has a tiny sliver of your face to target.

An academy instructor at the police agency I retired from used to add a silent little “a” at the end of OODA-“a” which he said stood for accept. Can we accept what’s happening? How quickly can we accept what’s happening? This goes back to the previous post where I wrote about the grief process applying to any bad news: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, or acceptance. Acceptance is the way around, over, under, or through bad news. Acceptance gives you more options and more time to maneuver, as it were.

As an introduction I’ve said a few things about the O-O-D-A Loop. God willing, in future posts I’ll paint a better picture of this fundamental principle of legitimate self-defense.

1Boyd the Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Robert Coram

2 Boyd the Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Robert Coram

3 Acolyte: one who attends or assists : FOLLOWER

4 Boyd the Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, Robert Coram

5 Compenetrate: to penetrate throughout : pervade.

6 Precedent: a judicial decision, a form of proceeding, or course of action that serves as a rule for future determinations in similar or analogous cases

7 Jurisprudence: the science or philosophy of law

So here’s my take on how the five stages of grief apply to bad news, crisis, and violent confrontations. It seems our country (and the world) has been getting a lot of bad news lately. I look around my Church, and I look around my country, and I grieve, over what’s been going on low these last many years, months, and days. In this post I’ll do my best to unpack these five stages. I’ll strive to tie it all back to leadership and legitimate firearms defense. This isn’t really my lane, but sometimes you just have to turn the 4X4 knob, and get some mud on the tires.

What are the five stages of grief?

At the end of my law enforcement career I had the privilege of co-leading the Professional Standards Division – Internal Affairs. Along with another Lieutenant, and a good friend, probably the biggest issue we strove to consistently deal with were peoples perceptions. There is reality, and there is often a gap between that objective reality and a man or a woman’s perceptions. When I think of perceptions I can’t help but think about how people have kind of a filter. The late Col John Boyd addressed this idea in his orientation stage of the OODA loop. Boyd’s orientation stage was said to include things like genetic heritage, cultural tradition, previous experience and purportedly Boyd believed the orientation stage was the most important part of the OODA loop since it shapes the way we observe, decide, and act.

So how do I see a persons filter? It is the result of a persons upbringing, the sum total of things like their religious beliefs, education, training, experiences, and their world view. What have they come to believe? What have they come to be convinced about, or not convinced about? These influences help to form how they perceive objective reality. Our challenge in Internal Affairs was to patiently, kindly, yet without watering down the truth one iota – strive to help folks understand why police officers did the things that they had to do. When body camera videos came onto the scene the footage helped with many, if not most, of the people we spoke with. Some small number of the people we spoke with, would simply reject the body camera footage. They had very strong filters, that seemingly allowed them to just bracket out reality. Perception or a mans filter, is going to have a powerful effect on a man’s decision making process.

Anytime the threats of bad news begin to loom large, fear begins to hold sway. Fear can dominate and keep us away from the stage we need to quickly arrive at – acceptance. The emotions vie for dominance of the will (challenging the intellect). The will is the decision making faculty of our soul. We decide within our will. Emotions can be good, or bad. Emotions need to be cross checked with our intellects. To build emotional strength we have ample opportunities every day to exercise and impose a kind of discipline regarding emotions like fear and anger. We have opportunities to begin training our wills to be subjective to our intellects.

Denial – at it’s essence is too much hope. It is an inability or an unwillingness to accept the realities that are holding sway. We see it with statements or thoughts like: How can this be? This cannot be happening! This is not happening! In Law Enforcement we understood there were three basic responses to high stress events fight, flight, or freezing. Denial would include freezing. If ‘all is well’ then there is no reason to fight or flee.

In the world of self-defense denial can be a killer. If we hesitate in a deadly force confrontation when a window of opportunity or a combat sweet spot presents itself, that is where we will die. Far worse than our own death, our hesitation, may get those depending upon our protection killed. With the exception of prayer, the four stages preceding acceptance are a waste of precious time. With prayer I’d choose to do that ahead of time, and afterwards. In an emergency often what happens is a man falls back to his trained responses. We hear folks being interviewed who acted heroically, say things like: I just did what I was trained to do. I think we kind of write it off as modesty. Weird how consistently we hear that, right? It is far better to build in a trained response which helps by-pass these other four stages of too much hope, anger, negotiating with an unjust aggressor, or too little hope. Do the work ahead of time through seeking out professional training (scenario based training or force on force), and pay attention to your surroundings. When the bad news comes make sure you’re already hanging out in the winningest of the five stages – acceptance.

Time is a precious commodity in any kind of a violent confrontation. How much the more precious is time in a deadly confrontation? All the more. Time is all the more precious in a deadly force confrontation. Long time trainers have a rule that applies to many if not most armed conflicts. The Rule of Three¹. Three seconds, three rounds sent, and three yards or closer. Watch any number of shootings on your favorite internet platform and when the firearms begin to come out how long until the whole thing is done and we have a winner, and we have a loser? The rule of three is a good guide.

Anger – Fear begins to hold sway and we get all spun up. We often lose our peace. Anger often moves a man to begin developing a plan. Having a strong desire to shore up hope, men scramble to figure out how to set things in right order. As long as a man is rightly perceiving that which is just and good, then good on ’em.

Generally, this is the stage where discouragement (an attack on hope), may segue into the restoration of order out of chaos. A good thing. This attack on hope also tempts a man towards the negotiating or depression stages. Men are tempted to lose hope, and it rightly makes them angry. Detachment is the winning mindset. Does the man have the emotional strength to detach, calmly wait for the window of opportunity, to open up? Sometimes you have to wait for a combat sweet spot.

Saint Thomas Aquinas gave us four things we tend to make into false idols, or puny little fake gods. Wealth, power, pleasure, & honors. These things can be good if used properly. It’s not wrong to have some share in these things. These four things become major moral problems (sin), when we become so attached that we’re spending all of our time thinking about them. So attached that we’re spending all of our time trying to acquire more and more of these. These things can be good, or they can be evil. How are we using them? How attached are we to them?

When you get angry does your ability to think improve or suffer? My ability to think – decreases when I get angry. An instructor at my old police academy sometimes would bring up the ‘puppy brain,’ both strong, and dumb. The dumb part is not conducive to winning across all five of the battlefields. If we get dumb in a life or death physical battle and we have not conditioned ourselves to control our own anger then we may die, or get our people killed. Because of our anger and ego, we may go too far, into revenge or vengeance, and rightly end up in prison. For the same reasons we may rightly end up bankrupt. We have to begin now conditioning ourselves towards meekness which throughout all of antiquity meant controlled strength. It did not, and does not mean to be passive, cowardly, or afraid of using force. It means when they surrender, we stop. It means if they don’t surrender when we render them unconscious, we stop. When they’re unconscious, they’ve stopped.

Saint Augustine gives us a proper way of viewing the emotion of anger:

“Hope has two beautiful daughters; their names are Anger and Courage. Anger at the way things are, and Courage to see that they do not remain as they are.”

― Augustine of Hippo

I have a few friends who are pilots. One is a professional pilot instructor for a major airline. They have provided me with an outstanding analogy. Pilots who become instrument certified learn that when they fly through clouds or fog they have to trust their instruments. They learn they cannot trust their feelings. For a pilot may feel as though he’s in a steep dive, though in fact, he’s flying straight and level. He may feel as though he’s flying, straight and level, and be in a steep dive. Pilots who are not instrument certified and find themselves unable to see the horizon, often die. A pilots instruments may be cross checked with other instruments to ensure all instruments are working properly. For a human being our intellect acts like the pilots instruments. Our emotions are like that feeling or sensation the pilot may experience. It is critical that a human being properly inform his intellect. Formation of a mans intellect is fundamental. Humility has been defined by St. Teresa of Avila as the acknowledgment of the truth. Truth is fundamental. You want to get this one right. Our emotions or passions can lead us into a steep dive, as it were. They can be right, or they can be wrong. In the world of legitimate self-defense these things are a matter of life or death, freedom or incarceration, financial stability or potential bankruptcy. And there are no guarantees. Why? Just watch the nightly news and you’ll see folks sitting in high seats having major malfunctions with their emotions juxtaposed to their ill or malformed intellects. So perhaps we win the physical battle and encounter major resistance with the legal, civil, and social battlefields.

With legitimate self-defense or defense of another, are there things worth dying for? Yes. Defending innocents from great bodily harm (Illinois), or death. For love of your people. What about love of my vehicle? No. That’s why I have insurance. Many people think it’s out of hatred of an unjust aggressor. It’s not. For a Catholic I believe we have to love the sinner and hate the sin. So I do hate the unjust aggressors actions. If I have to do some hard and seemingly dirty thing that nobody else wants to do, like shoot him in legitimate defense of others or self, when it’s over – when he’s stopped, I shall pray for him. I shall pray that he 1) live, and 2) repent and be saved. 3) If he should die, I shall pray for his soul to have had the grace to repent and be saved before that last beat of his heart. It is not out of hatred that a man ought to do those hard and seemingly dirty things nobody else wants to do. It is out of authentic love for his people, his brothers and sisters in arms, or respect and love for his own life. Life is a gift. Those who unjustly seek to take that gift, by unjust force must rightly be stopped. Period. We need to understand what the next right thing is morally, physically, legally, civilly, and perhaps even socially. There was a time not long ago in this country when most of the country did not suffer blindness, confusion of mind, and madness as it relates to a false compassion or a false pity for unjust aggressors. Now-a-days we have to evaluate what exchanges we’re personally willing to accept as it pertains to winning on the physical battlefield. That means to win the physical battle, we may have to accept far greater risks on the legal, civil, and social battlefields. Conditions in our legal, civil, and social systems have worsened in some places to the point of avoiding those places. I highly recommend you acknowledge and accept the current conditions on the ground, as it were.

With legitimate self-defense or defense of another, are there things worth going to prison for? Yes. Defending innocents from great bodily harm (Illinois), or death. For love of your people. To fulfill our grave moral duties to protect and defend those folks whom we’re responsible for. It’s a catastrophe, kind of a Greek tragedy, that I have to acknowledge how bad it’s gotten in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Sometimes acceptance sucks. But viewed through the lens of a long game, you’re better off facing things so you can do everything in your power to adopt the winningest logistics, strategies, and tactics. Detach and – do – your – job.

With legitimate self-defense or defense of another, are there things worth going bankrupt for? Yes. Defending innocents from great bodily harm (Illinois), or death. For love of your people. Generally, it always comes back to people. Protecting and defending people.

These are the kinds of exchanges we have to do the thinking and deciding ahead of time. What is it that we are we willing to risk death, prison, and bankruptcy for? Crowds are so fickle we may have to move. That is what it is. Do we have the “will,” to win? Do we have the will to protect those we purport to love? Arguably out of the three socially constructed battlefields (legal, civil, social), I believe we still have the best chances on the legal battlefield. That said, there are a few places I’d boycott visiting. These socially constructed battlefields come down to burdens of proof. The legal (as in criminal courts) burden of proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That is a much higher burden of proof than for a civil trial (civil litigation). A civil burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. That’s like 51%. The social battlefield is essentially whatever the people think. Public perception. You can be tried, convicted, and sentenced without the least little bit of due process on the social battlefield. People are crazy today. Today people confuse justice with vengeance. These are radically different things. Distinctions must be made. We cannot control the social battlefields. It’s a waste of time to worry about the social battlefield. It’s going to be, what it’s going to be.

Bargaining – the first thing that comes to my mind is prayer. Jesus gave us the example in the Garden of Gethsemane how to pray when facing a Cross. How to pray when facing bad – news:

37 He took along Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, 23 and began to feel sorrow and distress. 38 Then he said to them, “My soul is sorrowful even to death. 24 Remain here and keep watch with me.” 39 He advanced a little and fell prostrate in prayer, saying, “My Father, 25 if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet, not as I will, but as you will.”

Matthew 26

Prayer is essential, I exhort you to prayer daily.

The second thing that comes to mind regarding bargaining is despondency. Despondency is a losing of hope. We find ourselves looking for help. Now I don’t have any problem with legitimate diplomacy or negotiations. Negotiating in good faith, so long as it doesn’t compromise with evil, nor compromise with the common good, then it’s fine. Discussing things with people of good will in an effort to help them better understand something is good, right, and just. What does it mean when I say “people of good will,”? Good will means: they are open to; and seeking truth. One of the biggest problems we have in our crisis of leadership today is political correctness. Without truth there will never be unity. Unity subsists in the truth. Outside of the truth disunity, division, and enmity. In other words – war. Opposing wills.

Another major problem we have has to do with feckless men who sit in leadership seats and throw around buzzwords without ever having the fortitude to define precisely what those words mean. They use words like accountability, transparency, and even community policing as a sort of buzzword. What does that mean to you? Don’t you think you ought to define these words for your people? In our fallen world bargaining often ends up as compromise with evil. The world often seeks to offer a false kind of peace through compromise. Every time we compromise with evil somebody ends up footing the bill. We ought not compromise with evil. We need competent craftsmen who have spent their time well, coming to know their professions. We need integrity which means telling the truth patiently, kindly, and firmly without ever giving in to the temptation to water things down for personal gain. I digress.

Depression – An internet search for the definition of the word depression revealed, in part, a persistent feeling of sadness… How I see it, words like discouragement, despondency (losing hope), and despair (hope lost) provide insight into depression. Depression is too little of a hope. Depression can be very seductive. Why? It is a temptation to acquiesce to sadness and/or hopelessness. It is a temptation to give up and quit and say: There is nothing I can do about this – so why even try? It is a temptation to roll around in despondency and despair seemingly throwing off all responsibility to resist. It is a temptation to just go with the flow. It is a temptation to go quietly into that dark night. It is a temptation to just lay down and die, as it were.

Dom Lorenzo Scupoli wrote a book called The Spiritual Combat. There is an awesome line in the book that says this:

“On awaking in the morning,the first thing to be observed by your inward sight is the listed field in which you are enclosed, the law of the combat being that he who fights not must there lie dead forever.”

Dom Lorenzo Scupoli The Spiritual Combat

That my friends, is a most excellent saying! If you remember nothing else from this post remember that. Get up and fight or lay there dying the death – forever! There’s really only one choice. Now Father Scupoli is talking about the spiritual battlefield. But the principles for winning (and losing) apply across disciplines and areas of endeavor. A distinction has to be made. Men do weep when sadness takes hold of their emotions. There is no dishonor in weeping. A great friend of mine taught me that tears are to emotions / mind what sweat is to the body. If you have children sooner or later you – will – weep for your child. That dark sad day will come visit you if you live long enough. Been there, and done – that.

That is radically different and distinct from the kind of sadness and depression that threatens to take the heart [will] of a man.

Despair is the enemy as it relates to depression. We don’t want to go there. Despair serves to prevent a man from getting back on his feet and resolving to do the good and the next right things. There is no dishonor in being wounded in a battle. The only dishonor comes from desertion. The only dishonor comes from quitting. If you fall down get back up, and go stand guard at your post. If you get shot by an unjust aggressor – and you’re wounded but not yet dead, then put your firearm to work and keep that gun working until the unjust aggressor suffers a psychological stoppage and surrenders. If his ‘will’ won’t relent, then keep the gun working until the unjust aggressor suffers a physiological stoppage and he is rendered unconscious, dying or dead. The dying and dead part are God’s business, not our business. We’re not going to make sure that he is dead, and we are not going to engage in any kind of vengeance, but we absolutely are going to decisively win that fight!

As human beings we tend to have a very hard time with achieving and maintaining balance. We tend to go to extremes. With the grieving process, some folks tend to swing back and forth between too much hope (denial) and too little hope (depression). We may experience anger if we can’t figure out a plan as denial gives way to depression. We may desire to go back to denial. Everyone is different and it’s often by degree. If we get ourselves stuck in sadness (depression), despondency, and despair that is where we may die. That is where we may get others killed as well. Giving up we choose to lay there dying the death forever. Don’t give up. Don’t quit. Get back up! Get up my brothers and sisters, and fight! Soon enough time will give way to eternity and providing we went the right way, we can beat our swords into plowshares and cease training for war.

Acceptance – is the winningest – of all five stages. This stage is where you want to hang out, as it were. Why is acceptance so important? Well let me draw it back to leadership and legitimate self-defense. A friend and former academy instructor used to add a silent “a” to the OODA loop. The silent lower case “a” stood for an important principle. Acceptance. If you cannot accept what your observing then you’re not going to move quickly through the other stages of an OODA loop. You’re going to have trouble accurately perceiving or understanding when that combat sweet spot holds sway, that right now is the time you need to decide and act. When a window of opportunity opens up, that is the time to decisively move with surprise, speed, and violence of action through that window. When escape and avoidance are no longer options, and the only action left is to defend (meaning “to strike”), we ought not fight as if shadow boxing. We must commit to achieving and maintaining what’s been called relative superiority.

Acceptance in a deadly force confrontation is a matter of life or death. If you enter into denial thinking: this cannot be happening! How can this be? This isn’t happening! You and your people may die in that stage of grief, unless you’re kept alive by better men than yourself. A hard saying? Yes, it is a hard saying. Denial is like taking a stroll on a battlefield unaware of the combat happening all around you. How long until more bad news will find you, at several hundred feet per second? One definition of denial relates it to shock. Shock often results in panic. Panic kills. So how important is acceptance? Acceptance is a matter of life or death.

Panic can send a man to prison. If the circumstances of your deadly force shooting do not add up to that shooting being found objectively reasonable, then your decision making came down to a matter of freedom or incarceration. If you get angry and because through out your life you failed to exercise and discipline your emotional responses (impulse control problems), you may well end up in prison. Prison are full of men who because of ego, anger, and perhaps undisciplined perceived fears find themselves there. As an aside the meaning of the word Meekness throughout all of antiquity meant; controlled strength. Every day we have numerous opportunities to exercise control over our emotions and grow in virtues like patience. We can grow stronger at controlling our fears, anger, and in the tactical mindset of detachment.

Don’t entertain fantasies and myths that waste time. Don’t waste time swinging back and forth between too much or too little hope. Discipline yourself to accept sufferings, pains, and little humiliations, without complaint because if you someday find yourself in a life or death fight, you’re going to need to be as emotionally and mentally strong as is humanly possible. Discipline and condition your emotions to become subjective to your intellect. That way your will is informed and obedient to your intellect, not your emotions. Love is a decision! Love – is – a – decision. Love those for whom your responsible, to the end. Strive for a controlled strength and a detachment over emotions like fear and anger. May God give us these graces.

1This rule of three may have originated with Lt. Frank McGee former head of NYPD Firearms Training Unit.

The first time I recall being introduced to the term “Goofy Loop,” was likely as a young Field Training Sergeant. While seeking knowledge on my own to properly prepare my people, I purchased a book called Training at the Speed of Life, Vol. 1 by Kenneth R. Murray. Here is an excerpt from that book:

“It has been said that a definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. So it goes with the second intervention point, called the Goofy Loop:

Drop the gun, put it down, drop the weapon, I’m not telling you again, drop it, drop it now, sir … drop … the … gun, DROP THE GUN …

If you hear your student constantly repeat the same thing or versions of the same thing, or you observe him unsuccessfully attempt the same action three or more times, you are witnessing a Goofy Loop. He is stuck and needs to be dislodged. Either have a branch in the scenario for such an occurrence, or utilize a Socratic Questioning to dislodge him from his “stuck” place. Think of a Goofy Loop as a stuck record. Sometimes you have to nudge the record player a bit to get the record back on track.”¹

There is no shortage of police videos where officers tell an unjust aggressor to drop the gun over, and over, and over again. The record I’ve seen is around fifty warnings. That’s about forty nine too many. That is absurd beyond the pale.

To understand goofy loops we have to begin with an OODA loop. One craftsman among several down through the corridors of time was Colonel John Boyd, USAF. Boyd, a military strategist and fighter pilot, gave the world the OODA loop. OODA stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. The gist of the OODA loop, is a person has to first see or observe something, orient to or understand what it is he’s seeing, make a decision, then act on that decision. A man with great reflexes, professional training, who observes things developing may go through the OODA loop process in about three quarters of a second. There are some really fast sub one second draws on YouTube. I’ve seen other professional trainers (Thinking of the John Lovell Ret Army Ranger video) utilize a shot timer, hear the beep, draw, and get that first shot off in just under three quarters (.75) of a second. That’s fast. However, action beats reaction. That’s a principle. So for the man who operates outside of the law, he can raise a firearm inside of 3 yards, pointing it, and get that first shot off in around a quarter of a second (.25). All the unjust aggressor has to contend with, is the act stage of OODA. His observance, orientation, and decision making stages are often unknown to you. Yes, there are pre-attack indicators but that’s either learned through growing up, or working, in high threat environments (dangerous areas, as a target, not a tourist) for many years, or through professional training. Actions occurring in about a quarter of a second creates a problem for the innocent defender. Innocent defenders must learn the ways of denying unjust aggressors the opportunity to gain tactical advantages.

If you or I are the target of an ambush predator we want to observe them maneuvering on us as early as is humanly possible. Seeing early buys you time to maneuver away in avoidance or escape, or for tactical staging to properly defend ourselves.

Depending upon the circumstances a loud rebuke may serve as an ambiguity or a jeopardy test. Police officers rarely have a problem in the observing or orienting stages of OODA. Why? Training and experience. For a police officer the sticking point will most often occur in the decision making stage. It comes down to the “will.” Carl Von Clausewitz in his treaty On War defined war, in part, as coming down to the will of men. The “will,” is the decision making faculty of the soul. Often times we see emotions (passions) especially fear and anger dominate the “will.” We see a sort of battle taking place between the intellect and the emotions. Our intellects (knowledge) and emotions often battle over domination of our “will.” This battle plays out throughout our lives many times daily. The battle between sin or virtue, happens repeatedly throughout our day. The intellect is the highest faculty of the soul. The emotions are the lower faculties of the soul. Again, due to police training many if not most officers are quick to get their firearms out and up, in line with morality and the law. This is when for some, fear begins asserting itself into their decision making process. This isn’t true for all officers. There are plenty of video examples of officers who decisively win the physical battles they face. In all probability, the numbers probably look a lot like a bell curve.

An old friend and former training instructor at my old police academy used to add a silent “a” to the OODA-a loop which he said stood for acceptance. Can we accept what we’re seeing? Can we accept the context of what we’re seeing develop? Can we accept that next right thing we need to do – and then do it? When you see a goofy loop it’s often the result of an untrained response, lack of knowledge, or some fear holding sway. For officers it’s more often the latter – a fear. For a civilian it more often begins with the former – lack of a trained response and/or knowledge base. That doesn’t mean civilians won’t also suffer in the decision making stage of an OODA. Has that citizen been convinced they’re acting in accordance with morality? Has that citizen been convinced that legally they’re doing the right thing? Then there’s the reality on the ground where some district attorney’s suffer a false compassion for the unjust aggressors. A false pity for the robbers, rapists, and murderers. Here we find a fear of an unjust prosecution and incarceration. We are all living through the same strange time in history. For those who cannot accept the reality holding sway we see this:

“Drop the gun, put it down, drop the weapon, I’m not telling you again, drop it, drop it now, sir … drop … the … gun, DROP THE GUN …”²

Professional training ought to eliminate those hesitations based upon fears. We have to grow in discipline as it pertains to controlling our emotions especially fear and anger. Striving to remain calm and detached until such time as we need to act with surprise, speed, and violence of action. When an unjust aggressor is willing to insist upon his own way to the point of unjust threats of violence that is the time for decisiveness. That is the time to achieve and maintain a relative superiority until that unjust aggressors will changes or his will no longer matters. He still has a responsibility to stop doing his evil deeds. If he stops. We stop. This ain’t about competition. That’s for a ring with judges and a referee. As innocent people of good will – we’re not looking for fights and we’re not looking for revenge. Both of those are loser strategies on the legal, civil, and social battlefields. Time in any kind of violent confrontation is a precious commodity. I could repeat this a thousand times and it would not be enough. Time is a precious commodity in any kind of violent confrontation. All other things being equal – surprise, speed, SPEED – and violence of action win fights. Imbalances in subject factors or proportionality can mess this one up real quick. Surprise, speed, and violence of action attack a mans will by attacking his hope. When vigorously defending oneself the unjust aggressor has to deal with a rapid discouragement, despondency, and ultimately a kind of despair in being able to assert his unjust will. If done properly he enters into a kind of selfish, self serving, and preserving mindset of surrender. If we looked at it through the lens of the grieving process he’d be driven down into a depression (too little hope), where he suffers a psychological stoppage. His will to continue to fight goes away. Lawful force, brings him rapidly to depression and then enough acceptance to get him into custody. Unjust aggressors ego’s tend to be very resilient. So unjust men often ignore the loss on the physical battlefield and transition immediately to smack talking about the other battlefields as they’re being handcuffed: I’m going to have your job! I know powerful influences and politicians! The social battlefield! I’m going to sue you! I’m gonna get paid! The civil battlefield. You’re going to go to jail for using force against ME! The legal battlefield. I witnessed this play out over, and over, and over again. This is coming from experience not something I read in a book. These are face saving measures for a man who’s ego won’t accept he lost on the physical battlefield. Time is a precious commodity. Time ought not be wasted. Knowing where the lines are morally, physically, legally, civilly, and socially – are a matter of life or death, freedom or incarceration, financial stability or bankruptcy. The death, could be the death of someone you love and are gravely responsible to defend and protect. As the world enters more deeply into madness, those who would protect innocents will have to make exchanges in assumed risks. One might have to accept higher risks on the socially constructed battlefields of the legal, civil, and social, in order to accept the fundamental true principles on the moral and physical battlefields. Pretending that principles like: Action beats reaction are not true won’t help you win the fight. We must acknowledge reality even if this, that, or the other states attorney choose to run off to fantasy and myths.

Fear underlies many if not most of our problems. Fear underlies many if not most of our arguments. The next time you get into an argument ask yourself the question – What is the underlying fear of this argument? What do I fear I might lose here? Is this a threat to some perceived power or authority that I feel that I’m due? Is the perceived threat financial in it’s nature? Do I fear a perceived threat to some pleasure I believe that I’m due? Is this a perceived threat against some honor or respect I feel that I’m due? What is it I yet fear? It is a fear of losing something. That loss might be real or it might be imagined. St. Thomas Aquinas gave us four things we’re often tempted to, and do place above God: Wealth, power, pleasures, & honors. We all need some wealth to provide for ourselves and our families. These four things are not evil in and of themselves. They are good if used properly. Gasoline is good for combustible engines. Don’t you go drink a pint of it. That would kill you. These four things only become a moral problem if and when we get unbalanced to the point of attachment. Sadly we sometimes make one or more of these four things into little gods, or false idols, by spending all of our time thinking about, and striving, to accumulate more and more of them. When that happens the fear of losing one of these things will have a say in what we do next. Detachment is a winning mindset both in spiritual battles and in physical battles. Fear underlies pride. Fear underlies anger. Fear underlies the really worst parts of a mans ego. Fear – dominates. Show me the man who can dominate his own fears and I’ll show you a fiercely competent warrior. Goofy loops in Law Enforcement often stem from a fear of a loss of employment. There is a crisis of leadership today everywhere I look, and the troops know it. The troops have found out what and who their so called leaders are all about. Too many specious leaders are simply looking out for #1. Goofy loops may stem from a fear of the states attorney. Too many states attorney’s suffer terrible cases of false compassion for unjust aggressors. They suffer a false pity for the robbers, rapists, and murderers in their communities. That fear of the district attorney who holds prosecutor discretion or power, at it’s root is a fear of a loss of freedom. It is a fear of an unjust incarceration. We’re seeing these things increasingly hold sway. It doesn’t do anyone any good to deny the realities on the ground. Madness seems to have gained a foothold in the greatest nation on the face of the earth in far too many places. In some cases the goofy loop stems from a fear of political correctness. Political correctness is a curse and pox upon our land – and it’s getting worse!

“Drop the gun, put it down, drop the weapon, I’m not telling you again, drop it, drop it now, sir … drop … the … gun, DROP THE GUN …” ²

A goofy loop at it’s root is; an abdication of a responsibility by an officer, or by a citizen. Abdicating the decision of who lives and who potentially dies over to the unjust aggressor. Permitting the unjust aggressor to decide. Does that sound like a good idea to anyone? Sometimes as I alluded before, you don’t have an opportunity to stop the threat and you have to wait for that window of opportunity to open up. If you failed to pay attention or if the unjust aggressor really is that good at gaining a deep flank or an ambush position, sometimes you have to wait for him to turn away. Sometimes you have to wait to be in a better position like in his blind spot. It’s always best to exercise situational awareness doing our best to avoid these things early on.

It’s said that denial is the first stage in the grieving process. That five step process of 1) denial, 2) anger, 3) bargaining, 4) depression, and 5) acceptance doesn’t merely apply to grief. It applies to any, and all, bad news. It applies to a crisis. It applies to violent confrontations. How quickly can a man arrive at acceptance? Perhaps I’ll do a follow up post on the five step bad news process. Suffice to say denial is the stage where we encounter too much hope. An excess in hope. ‘Perhaps if I warn this guy 37 more times I won’t have to do my grave duty. I won’t have to incur any risks on the legal, civil, and social battlefields. This is all about me right? Maybe this unjust aggressive man will have a change of mind, a change of heart, a change of his “will.” Maybe he’ll show me mercy and compassion. Perhaps this will all just work out.

So where’s the harm? If I gamble my life or the lives of those I have a grave duty to protect by engaging in a goofy loop of 3, 17, or 37 warnings and I lose that gamble where’s the harm? Well, my friends, the harm is you and or your people suffer grave bodily harm or death. That’s the harm. That’s the context. So what is an acceptable percentage you’re willing to gamble? The correct answer of course is zero percent. We ought not gamble even one tenth of a percent, when dealing with an unjust aggressor looking to rob, rape, cause grave bodily harm, or death. He’s not entitled to even one tenth of one percent. Now he may have come to expect 27 warnings and there are plenty of progressive media folk and politicians that may disagree but if we’re talking legitimate moral and legal rights coming from God, and here in the United States the Declaration of Independence unjust aggressors don’t have any legitimate rights to threaten grave bodily harm nor death to innocents.

If you’re a police officer you’re responsible for every innocent citizen. Innocent being the qualifying term. If you’re a police officer you’re responsible for every brother or sister in arms. As a Catholic I can tell you with certainty that as a husband and father morally I have a grave duty to protect and defend my wife and children.

What is the only objectively reasonable response for an armed unjust aggressor when confronted by legitimate authority? The legitimate authority might be a police officer or an innocent citizen at home, in a vehicle, or on foot. When a police officer or other innocent citizen is placed in a reasonable apprehension of grave bodily injury or death confronts an unjust aggressor the only thing for the unjust man to do is to drop his gun and cease representing a deadly force threat. If he was armed with a blunt or edged weapon in close proximity the only thing to do is to drop that blunt or edged weapon. If he was advancing it’s to stop advancing. If he was unarmed advancing on a drawn gun then stop advancing. This is not rocket science. Whatever the unjust aggressor is doing to have achieved and maintain a threat of great bodily harm or death he ought STOP DOING THAT!

If the unjust man is reaching for a concealed area (waistline), and an innocent person who is experiencing a reasonable apprehension this guy going for a weapon, then when the citizen points a firearm at him the unjust man ought to stop reaching for that waistline. Show both hands, and comply or leave. Keep it simple.

Would you feel better if the unjust aggressor shouted at the top of his lungs “NO!” Would you feel better if he verbally pronounced his intention to murder you and yours? It’s not about how you feel. It’s not even about you. It’s for your people. If I ever write a book on authentic leadership I plan on titling it: For Your People. The unjust aggressor’s action – is – his decision. Accept it. Can you accept it? The sooner we can skip the other four stages of bad news (grief) and advance to acceptance – the better. I better write that again as maybe you’ve never heard this before. Actions – are – decisions. Unjust aggressors decide and reveal their decisions via their actions. What he does or fails to do, right? Right. And then the consequences play out. To think that an innocent is somehow required to gamble with their lives, the lives of their brothers in arms, or those for whom they’re responsible to protect is absurd beyond the pale. No innocent person should ever have to gamble any percentage of their life to an unjust aggressor threatening grave bodily harm or death.

As a society we ought to take a step back, look at these things honestly, and stop with false compassion for the unjust aggressors.

Verbal warnings many times are not feasible. Television would have you believe that police are required to shout out “Police, drop the gun!” That is not required in many places, nor under many circumstances. Seek out professional training to begin learning what is and what is not objectively reasonable. In my old police house it was a question of feasibility. If feasible we gave verbal warnings. In some cases to give a warning would be akin to shouting: “Police, right here! Shoot me first! Shoot me now! What are you waiting for?” Just about every time we gave verbal warnings the unjust citizen then wanted to make a complaint against officers for threatening them.

As I wrote before, when an unjust man finds himself in deadly force confrontation with legitimate authority (lawman or citizen), there is only one right thing for the unjust man to do. Immediately – and I mean IMMEDIATELY drop his gun, show his palms, step back away from that firearm, and obey every single command perfectly. That’s it. Any man who fails to separate himself from his firearm has already made that next critical decision. That decision is the action of continuing to hold onto his gun. Perhaps his decision is the action of continuing to hold on to (retention of / alignment with) a blunt or edged weapon in close proximity to an innocent. Perhaps his decision is the action of continuing to advance and compress time and distance with an innocent while armed or even advancing while unarmed on a drawn gun held by an innocent (that would be one gun in the fight). In it’s essence it is having achieved and maintained the ongoing unjust threat. The unjust chooses retention of and alignment with his weapon of choice for the next decision. Is he going to choose to stop, turn back, and leave? Or is he going to raise it and use it against you and yours? Decisions, decisions. The threat remains as the seconds continue clicking by and the circumstances remain “tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving,” the language of Graham vs Connor.

“The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments – in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving – about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.”³

You either arrive at acceptance, and do what needs to be done, or you gamble and abdicate your grave duty of those you’re responsible to protect over to an unjust aggressor. You have to decide. Permitting an unjust aggressor to decide is betting against yourself and those you purport to love. It is betting on the mercy of a man demonstrating gravely evil unjust actions. It is grossly imprudent in my estimation. Not deciding – is – a – decision. The action of legitimate defense of self or others is different in substance from the unjust robbing, raping, kidnapping, murdering, and setting fire to an innocent.

Do not abdicate the decision over who lives and who dies to an unjust aggressor. If you gamble on an unjust aggressor showing you and yours mercy, you error, you error. Take seriously your grave duty to protect those for whom you’re responsible for.

Every single tactical question in the world can be answered with just two words. It depends. Little by little we come to learn what it depends upon. Begin today. The longest journey still requires that the first steps be taken, and God willing, we may have miles yet to walk. May God give us the grace to choose the right road.

1Training at the Speed of Life, Vol. 1 by Kenneth R. Murray

2Training at the Speed of Life, Vol. 1 by Kenneth R. Murray

3United States Supreme Court GRAHAM v. CONNOR(1989)

Mindset has more than one aspect to consider. We could talk at length about detachment which is a major part of a winning mindset. We could talk about how well or poorly we’ve informed our intellects via knowledge and training. Furthermore, we could deep dive into self-awareness and humility versus arrogance. As Socrates said – know thyself, right? We could talk about the proper and improper uses of emotions like fear and anger, as major parts of mindset. We could talk about a learned or experiential propensity for violence. We could talk about why a winning mindset far surpasses a competitive, or survival type mindset. We could talk hard realities like how easy a superior foe can be felled with simple opportunity. The acceptance of that knowledge is crucial to mindset. Ignore it at your own peril. Those are all critical aspects of mindset. We have to begin somewhere so we’re going to begin with a couple of hard questions: Are you prepared to deal out lethal blows to stop an unjust aggressor from causing you or yours, Great Bodily Harm GBH, or death? (Statutory language in Illinois – know your state statutes) Are you prepared to die, that your people might live? In this post I’ll explore some aspects of these two questions.

In my latter twenties, as I grew in my Catholic faith I began questioning where the moral lines were relating the proper use of violence. Because of my occupation in law enforcement, I understood well – where the legal lines were. In my case, I sought guidance from a devout Catholic priest who prior to becoming a priest, happened to have served his country in the United States Army. For a Catholic it can be a very serious sin to fail to defend the people you’re responsible for. All Christian’s could benefit from this knowledge:

There is a lot to unpack in these teachings. I’m not going to attempt to unpack all of it in this post.

Generally speaking in America we’re supposed to be an “innocent,” defending ourselves against an unjust aggressor. The threat of force is supposed to be imminent, and our response to that threat is to be proportional to the level of the threat ie; non-deadly or deadly? Where feasible, we ought to avoid violent confrontations. However, the bad guy always gets a vote, right? The force we use ought to be both objectively and subjectively reasonable.

A sound moral and legal strategy is to limit our force to stopping the unjust aggressor. Stopping him is our intention. If an unjust aggressor changes his will and surrenders – we stop using force. If an unjust aggressor refuses to relent but is rendered unconscious – we stop using force. Our intention is not to kill the unjust aggressor. That may be the result of the force we use, but our intention is to stop him. There is a distinction here that is not mere semantics, and it has to do with our intention being limited to stopping. In dealing with an unjust aggressor who presents the threat of GBH, or death we must be willing to deal out lethal blows. A lethal blow is likely to cause death. Likely is not a guarantee. People are moving, accuracy isn’t perfect, especially during tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving confrontations. If our intention was to kill the unjust aggressor we’d attach bayonets and finish him while he lays unconscious. If our goal was to kill him, once we incapacitate him we would put more rounds in his head and never call for an ambulance. We’d get the shovel from the shed, as it were.

I’m going to convey this again: When an unjust aggressors will changes to a full surrender or a compliance (depending upon the circumstances), or his will is forcibly removed through unconsciousness – THEN we stop using lethal force. However, until their will to cause us or ours GBH, or death is removed – we strike, strike, strike, strike, and strike. We must be willing to exhaust ourselves in an effort of achieving and maintaining a kind of relative superiority until they have a change of their will. Some men will never have a change of will. Some men you will have to render unconscious, dying, or dead just to stop them.

Battlefield Exchanges

To properly apply fundamental principles in an ever changing world we have to sometimes assume greater risks on one battlefield over another. In a day and age where some elected states attorney’s over-zealously charge even police officers for doing the hard job of stopping an unjust aggressor, we have to accept that we may incur a higher risk on that legal battlefield. We have to be willing to accept an exchange of higher risks on one battlefield or another, if we seek to win.

“Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.” Vince Lombardi

Spiritually this is a truth. If we fail to cooperate with the graces given and fail to make it home to our Heavenly Fathers house – we fail – forever. That is why I believe the moral battlefield is the highest of all battlefields. If we fail to get that one right – that failure may be eternal. Morally and legally, as an innocent we have a right to life. Unjust aggressors are “unjust.” The unjust have no right to rob, rape, or murder. They actually forfeit their right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, when they set their will, on a course of robbery, rape, and murder. Their only hope, is to immediately cease all deadly force threat towards an innocent. Does that mean the elected states attorney in your jurisdiction will see things your way? No. There are no guarantees. That is primarily why I’ve purchased concealed carry insurance.

Who are we preparing to fight? Are we preparing to fight an unjust aggressor who will surrender at the very sight of our firearm? No. If that happens, that’s great. Are we preparing to fight an unjust aggressor who will suffer a psychological stoppage after the first bullet enters his chest cavity? No. If that happens, that’s great. Thank goodness, at whatever point he suffers a psychological stoppage. Are we preparing to fight an unjust aggressor who has made a decision that you will have to kill him to stop him, and that he will not stop until your dead? Yes. Yes this is precisely who we are training to fight. The worst possible unjust aggressor on the planet. Why? Because to presume any lesser unjust aggressor will show up, is to gamble with one’s own life and/or the lives of those we hold a grave duty to protect. If we make a mistake in that kind of a gamble we may die, and ever worse, those whom we purport to love and are responsible for may die. When the harm to you and yours is GBH, or death don’t gamble, don’t hesitate, don’t abdicate the decision of who lives and who dies over to an unjust aggressor. Do the hard seemingly dirty things that ought to get done to decisively win. When the window of opportunity opens on an unjust deadly force threat, it will not long remain open. You may only get one window of opportunity. Should a combat sweet spot or window of opportunity open with an unjust deadly force threat, move through it violently, with lethal blows and don’t dare let off that trigger until he clearly surrenders or he’s rendered unconscious, dying, or dead. Period.

It is legitimate morally speaking to insist upon more respect for one’s own life than any number of unjust aggressors. Again, our intention should be to stop them. If they live or die, ultimately that’s God’s business. We’re not finishing anyone off. We’re not seeking vengeance – that’s God’s business. Not our business.

Moderate violence isn’t what it used to be. Moderate violence in my opinion is anything short of deadly force. Imagine St. Peter the first Catholic Pope explaining to a modern states attorney how cutting off the high servants ear was moderate violence. Moderate violence isn’t what it used to be, and there is a difference between what is moral and what is legal. What is legal or more importantly what a modern states attorney of a certain mindset, may interpret as legal grows weaker by the day. Today, even police officers who follow the United States Supreme Court case law precedents like Terry V Ohio, Tennessee V Garner, and Graham V Connor have problems in various places with liberal minded states attorneys. I’m not going to deep dive down that rabbit hole. That would be a long digression.

The Catechism says “Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others.” Grave duty means – serious sin if you blow off that duty. There is no right to be a pacifist if you’re a Catholic. If we go out and murder an innocent, that is a grave sin. If we refuse to deal – a lethal blow to an unjust aggressor threatening to murder innocents we’re responsible for – that too would be a grave sin. The idea of a fence to straddle is a deception, a lie. There – is – no – fence. Do good, and avoid evil. We best do the work to understand where those lines are.

The grave duty to defend doesn’t say anything about succeeding. I can’t guarantee you or I are going to live through any deadly force confrontation. Some are far more risky than others. When your mission is simply to avoid, or defend yourself, you can take more calculated risks. When your mission is to protect those you’re responsible for, the risks you must accept will be of the highest nature. In the first place you’re only as fast as your slowest loved one. That loved one might be two or eighty two. Your job is to buy time and opportunity that your people escape. You purchase the time needed for that to happen by incurring greater risks and moving into the gap. Where escape is not an option your job is to move into the gap, accepting if anyone is going to be shot here today – it’s you. Not your people. Hint: pray early and often for the graces needed rather than relying on your own strength for something this noble and good.

If it were just my wife and I at home asleep, and someone was to break in, I would barricade in the bedroom, grab my firearm, and have a plan for my wife to call and stay on the line with the 911 dispatcher. I would have the police come deal with the intruder. The police would incur all the physical, legal, civil, and social risks. I would do what I need to do, if and when, the unjust insists on compressing into our bedroom.

However, in my home I still have three children whom I’m gravely responsible for. Our bedroom is upstairs and the children’s bedrooms are downstairs. If I were to be awakened at O’ dark thirty by the sound of the walkout slider door shattering, barricading in place is not an option. As a father, I must move direct to the threat, to access and solve whatever potentially violent problem I’m confronted with. That means I’m going to have to do my best to get to the problem before they get to one of my children. Direct to the threat often means point blank range with that threat. What is in his hands? If he has a firearm in his hands and he’s not a police officer, there is absolutely nothing to discuss. The only sounds should be the concussion of my firearm discharging sending lead into his chest and face until such time as he voluntarily separates himself from his firearm or he’s unconscious, dying, or dead. As always the dead part is God’s business, not my business.

One Gun In the Fight

If he doesn’t have a firearm in his hands the only acceptable responses are he’s either leaving or he’s freezing in place. What he is not going to be permitted to do, in my house, is align on the firearm in my hands and compress distance on that firearm. Why? I will not gift him an opportunity to disarm me and use my firearm against me and my family. He will be shot as he compresses time and distance on my drawn gun. An unjust aggressor will not be permitted to engage in a hand to hand battle over control of my firearm.

Point Blank Range

Point blank range is inherently dangerous when dealing with an unjust criminal aggressor. Why? It is really hard to miss your target at point blank range. It can happen especially if one of the combatants gains surprise and the other finds himself so far behind in John Boyd’s OODA loop (Observe Orient Decide Act) that they’re literally being shot. Then panic sinks in deep and one might try to just make some noise with their firearm in hopes of turning the fight around. This sometimes happens to police officers who get too far behind in a gunfight. Bad guys with felony convictions don’t typically get issued FOID cards in the state of Illinois. They don’t typically have access to a square ranges to practice marksmanship. They don’t typically have access to competent firearms instructors to help them get better at marksmanship, combat shooting, or any other skill based training to help them improve in competence. Bad guys use ruses and lies to gain point blank range. Point blank range is their competency range. Once they gain it then comes the surprise and subsequent domination. As a father, I have to move direct to the threat to ensure that threat cannot and will not gain opportunity over one of my little ones. Solo room clearing or moving direct to the threat is essentially mutual destruction. When that unjust aggressor breaches your little castle and begins maneuvering throughout it while armed with a firearm you have to be prepared to stop him.

Shot Ain’t Dead

Have you ever considered the possibility of being shot? You should because if you’re planning on solo room clearing direct to the threat, that very well may happen. Just because you’re shot doesn’t mean your dead. Can you still win the fight if you’re shot? Yes. Can you still win the fight if you are mortally wounded and you are going to die? Yes. What’s your mission? Protect your wife and children. If you stop the threat do you complete your mission? Yes. Even if you die? Yes. This mission isn’t about you – it’s for – your – people. Even if you’re heart shot you may still have double digit seconds left before your blood pressure crashes and you lose consciousness. Pray for the grace to burn it in. Pray for the grace to complete your mission. Decide now to be in that small percentage of folks who accept even death with a desire to protect and keep their people safe. A hard saying. Pray ahead of time asking for those graces. The question is: What are you going to do with whatever time you’ve been given? If you have 12 seconds – make – them – count. Focus on getting your firearm working and keeping your firearm working until he’s stopped. Don’t waste precious time. Stop – the – unjust – aggressor. Focus on winning the fight.

Once he’s done if you’re still breathing then is the time for spiritual and physical self care. Then you can make your peace with God, simultaneously applying whatever physical self care you can to slow down your bleeding. Forget about the Hollywood nonsense. Almost everything you’ve seen on television as it relates to what to expect when you’ve been shot is nonsense. Dead is dead. Shot is not dead. Win – the – fight.

Conclusion

There are many aspects of mindset. Suffice to say if you want the highest probability of winning in a deadly force encounter, then you need to begin by thinking, and praying on these first two fundamental questions. Are you willing to deal out as many lethal blows as it takes to STOP an unjust aggressor? Are you prepared to risk and die in an effort to STOP an unjust aggressor that others might live? Don’t wait until an unjust aggressor forces his will upon you to figure out where you stand on these fundamental questions. Uncertainty and confusion on these questions are massive disadvantages in combat. It is far better to be involved in a shooting than a gunfight with an unjust aggressor. The distinction is an unjust aggressor in a gunfight is shooting back at you. The advantages go to the man or woman willing to do the hard, and seemingly – I say seemingly dirty things. Those things are not dirty – they seem dirty to a weak kneed generation raised in exceeding comfort. They seem dirty when presented in a certain kind of light by ideologues in the media. The actions of legitimately insisting upon one’s own right to life, or an innocent loved one, over and above an unjust aggressor is good, right, and just. It is not dirty. If you know what your doing it’s also not fair. We don’t seek fair. We seek to win. Remember, shootings are better than gunfights. May God give us all the graces we need to do good and avoid evil.

1Catechism of the Catholic Church

To become a craftsman, is to become competent. Competence is an attribute of leadership. There is an old Latin saying: Nemo dat quod non habet – You cannot give what you do not have. How do you purport to lead if you don’t know the way? Knowledge. Do you have the ability to explain, show, and do the job? Skill. If you’ve done the work you should strive to understand the how, why, what, where, when, and who of all aspects of your craft. Why? You can’t give what you don’t have. If you expect your people to do a job and to do it well, then be able to properly prepare them to meet and exceed the standard. In this post, I will look at a few angles associated with craftsmanship. I will share a priceless excerpt from C.S. Lewis short essay, The Inner Ring.

The Crisis

Stories of incompetence abound in every profession. Why? There is a crisis of leadership today. It’s easier to accept incompetence than it is to ask, tell, and make subordinates, come up to the standard. People like easy. You have to care to endure the discomfort involved in leading. Patient coaching of subordinates or holding them accountable is uncomfortable. Leadership requires teaching, reproofs, and correcting. Confrontation is a major part of this. A failure to confront is at the very heart of this crisis. Hoping the problem will somehow fix itself, is not a plan. Failure to lead is indifference at best, and cowardice at worst. Confronting another human being with patience, kindness (concern for), and firmness is challenging. There should be no hint of compromise. It might sound something like this:

‘I’m making a commitment to you to do everything within my abilities to help you to meet and exceed standards. I will break my back, as it were, to coach you to success. I care and I’m willing to do the work it will take to prove it. I want and expect to see you improve at this, that, or the other thing. I’m also making a commitment to you, that if you refuse to do your job, then I will begin documenting. I will keep documenting and start the disciplinary process. That will continue until you have suspended, demoted, and fired yourself. Please accept my sincerest desire to help you. You have to decide. My job is to confirm your decision, and let the consequences play out!’

Too many people who ought to care – don’t! If you’re in a leadership position, spend your time focused on becoming a craftsman. Provide your people with the highest probability of success.

Accountability

Merriam Websters defines accountable: 1) Subject to giving an account; answerable. 2) capable of being accounted for: explainable.

Both definitions carry a responsibility for leaders. There is a responsibility to discipline, fire, or properly defend your people. Is the accused actually responsible (answerable), or is he able to explain (explainable) it away? Discipline those who deserve it! Properly defend those who acted rightly and justly! This is simple, yet hard to do. Accountability is not a one way street. One way justice, ain’t justice, it’s revenge. Here is a partial definition of justice:

“As a virtue, it is the constant and permanent determination to give everyone his or her rightful due…¹”

Accountability depends upon who is innocent and who’s unjust. The innocent go free, the unjust answer.

Is your leadership “willing” to do the hard and seemingly dirty things that need to get done? Is your leadership “willing” to do the unpopular and inconvenient things that need to get done? Who does your leadership fear? My boss won’t like me! This, that, or the other special interest group won’t like me! The media won’t like me! My troops won’t like me! Indeed. Just do the right thing and don’t worry about who likes you and who doesn’t! If you stand for something you will have people lining up, who don’t like you. Stop with buzzwords, and define things clearly. If you want to be liked, buy a puppy.

You Do It Right

I recall a Catholic priest sharing he once asked a seminary professor: What do we do if we find ourselves serving under a bad Bishop? The answer was simple, yet profound. He said he was told to be aware of the problems, but in the end: You do it right. Doing it right often involves the risk of paying a price. The authority given to leaders is a responsibility. It’s not about you! It’s for your people.

One of my best friends is a pilot. He told me when he became a Captain, an authentic leader told him to look over at his right shoulder. On his right shoulder were four stripes representing the rank of a Captain. As a First Officer, he formerly sported three stripes. Upon completion of his final check ride, this leader extended his index finger and poked my friends shoulder as he touched each stripe he emphasized four words. He said: Its – all – your – fault!

What was he telling this young Captain? He was telling him to accept the responsibility given to him to do right things. He was telling him there are no excuses in the end. He was telling him you can’t blame the flight attendant who’s begging you they need to make it home tonight. He was telling him you can’t blame the first officer. You can’t blame the company. You cannot blame an incompetent air traffic controller. He was telling him, the authority given – is – for – your – people. Time to grow up and be answerable as it is all the Captains fault. A Captain is answerable for doing the right thing, for the right reason, at the right time, and in the right way. The way we fix this crisis in leadership is one person at a time. You, whoever you are and wherever you find yourself, do it right. Become a craftsman! Why? You can’t give what you don’t have.

C.S. Lewis The Inner Ring

C.S. Lewis was a Christian British writer born in 1898 and died in 1963. If you have not had the pleasure of reading The Inner Ring you can read it at:

https://www.lewissociety.org/innerring/

“The quest of the Inner Ring will break your hearts unless you break it. But if you break it, a surprising result will follow. If in your working hours you make the work your end, you will presently find yourself all unawares inside the only circle in your profession that really matters. You will be one of the sound craftsmen, and other sound craftsmen will know it. This group of craftsmen will by no means coincide with the Inner Ring or the Important People or the People in the Know. It will not shape that professional policy or work up that professional influence which fights for the profession as a whole against the public: nor will it lead to those periodic scandals and crises which the Inner Ring produces. But it will do those things which that profession exists to do and will in the long run be responsible for all the respect which that profession in fact enjoys and which the speeches and advertisements cannot maintain.”2

The Inner Ring is about a desire to be inside the innermost circles of knowledge, influence, and power. Lewis provides deep insights into these innermost concentric rings. It comes down to time. What do we do with the time given? Today many focus on ‘the game,’ meaning politics. Politicians spend all their time focused on becoming a craftsman at politics. We need craftsmen at the jobs professions actually exist to do. Political craftsmen often fail to properly defend their people when they act rightly. Why? Compromise (a form of indifference), or cowardice.

Whoever you are and wherever you find yourself, these principles apply to you. Whatever you do in life strive to become a craftsman. Don’t settle for mediocrity or substandard performance. Use your time well. If you are accountable for subordinates, help them and if they refuse to do their jobs discipline them. I’m going to conclude this post with a quote from Vince Lombardi. It is very relevant:

“I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious.” Vince Lombardi

May God give all of us the grace, in the end, to lay exhausted on the field of battle.

1 Modern Catholic Dictionary, by Fr. John A. Hardon

2 The Inner Ring, C.S. Lewis