Blog

One of my biggest regrets in my book was stumbling across English’s research way too late. I was only able to mention it briefly. In fact it is worse than that, because I hadn’t heard of it, I had assumed that some of the Defensive Gun Use (DGU) statistics I referenced came from Kleck’s research when they may have come from English’s research. I hope to do a deep dive and issue corrections sometime this year. This mistake is embarrassing for me as I may be comparing English’s research to, well, English’s research. DOH! I hope to make some amends by looking at the updated analysis in this posting.

The paper is professional and is also an easy read. I would recommend that everyone take the time to read it (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494). I’ll focus only on those items that I think are significant that I did not have time to incorporate (purposefully or accidentally!) in my book. However, there is something that is important to mention:

• In my analysis of the National Crime Victimization Survey data, injurious violent crime had some attributes that deserve attention. The first is that the victim usually knows the offender. Second, the location of the incident is commonly at the home or the property of the home. Lastly, the offender doesn’t use a firearm often. I believe these attributes support and compliment the DGU work English has done. Based upon his analysis, most DGUs occur at the home or property of the home and the firearm is usually not discharged.

Some other interesting data from English’s paper:

• 9.1% of DGUs occurred in public.
• 48.8% of DGUs involved one assailant, 51.2% involved more than one.
• 1.5 million incidents per year where the presence of a firearm deterred crime (i.e., firearm was not discharged).
• 16% of gun owners carry a concealed firearm always or often. While English includes “Sometimes” as part of the concealed carry regime, I do not.
• Around 44% of gun owners never carry a concealed firearm.
• Using a firearm to defend against non-human animals was significant.

For my book and based on this research, I think the biggest area that needs improvement is researching multiple offenders. My analysis focused on a single offender. Additionally, I didn’t factor in using a firearm to defend against non-human animals. However, is suspect, much like violent crime, there are many things you can do to dramatically reduce your risk.

1. In the city: A common theme in the city is that you are walking your dog and another dog gets loose from the backyard of a resident. These dogs are not familiar with other dogs and they could attack your dogs as well as you. Also, city dogs that are familiar with humans and are trained to attack strangers are very dangerous to other residents if they get loose. Additionally, dogs without a leash are always suspect. Finally, even if a dog is on a leash, they can get away from their owner. If you are enjoying time in the city, a JPX4 Compact or JPX6 will help protect you. These are non-fatal effective weapons that shoot pepper spray up effectively up to around 18 feet (see my book on these products). A cautionary note about using firearms in this situation is that you may find yourself in a gunfight if you shoot someone’s pet, even if their pet attacks you. There is an unnatural fixation with some pet owners who consider their pet their child, and even if their “child” is in the wrong, will consider lethal acts against them to be cause for escalation. In short, if you carry a firearm, you should also carry a JPX4/JPX6 (or perhaps bear spray) when walking in the city, especially when walking your dogs.
2. For the rest of this list, I’ll focus on the country. Unlike the city, firearms are more appropriate for the country and animal attacks. I’m going to assume if you are hunting, you are prepared for animal attacks. However, if you are just out hiking or enjoying the woods, here are some questions to ponder.
3. What animals have been known to attack humans in your area?
4. Are these animals solitary or pack animals?
5. What time of year is it? Are mothers with their young? The motherly instinct is alive and well in animals. Don’t mess with it. /
6. What way is the wind blowing? Ideally, you’ll want animals to smell you before they see you. The wind at your back and blowing past you to trail ahead is best.
7. Make noise. If that ruins the outdoors for you, check if you can get some device that makes noise that humans can’t hear but the critters in the area can hear.
8. If you are walking with someone, like your spouse, recognize that a large animal such as a bear, will be throwing their prey around. If you are armed with a firearm, you may not get a clear shot until that someone is dead. If you are walking with someone, you can carry a firearm and they can carry a JPX4/JPX6, or bear spray if you are in bear country.
9. While their is always a chance you will run into a starving/wounded/rabid animal, I suspect many attacks happen in “hold my beer” moments. Don’t be stupid with wild animals.

Let’s get back to William’s work. I think William’s did a lot of things right here. In addition, there is a good amount of information on weapon type and magazine capacity. For my book, this information wasn’t directly relevant to what I was discussing.

For future DGUs research, it would be interesting to learn the following:

• Was your assailant or were any of your assailants armed with a firearm?
• Was your assailant or were any of your assailants armed with a non-firearm weapon?
• If the firearm was not discharged, did you report the matter to law enforcement?
• If the firearm was discharged, did you report the matter to law enforcement?
• If you did not report the matter to law enforcement, what was the reason? Too much hassle, not enough information to bother law enforcement, or afraid criminal charges would be weighed against you?
• If you had a single assailant, was the assailant a stranger or couldn’t be identified (e.g., masked)?
• If you had multiple assailants, were they all strangers or couldn’t be identified (e.g., masked)?
• If your assailant (or at least one of your assailants) was identified and not a stranger, what was your relationship to the assailant? Former friend, ex-lover, ex-spouse, acquaintance, biological family, stepfamily, or in-law family.

My book and blog posts are for ordinary civilians who may not have any firearm experience or self-defense experience. As such, I prioritize things like safety over speed (see a previous post). In this post, I will prioritize simplicity over things like capacity and reloading speed. As such, I will recommend certain types of revolvers over semi-automatic pistols.

My book references a civilian Defensive Gun Use (DGU) study where the firearm was discharged. One of the data points was that the average number of rounds shot is two. This data point shows that capacity and reloading speed should not be prioritized as high for a civilian’s defensive firearm as, for example, a law enforcement officer or SWAT team member.

What if your revolver will be your Every Day Carry (EDC)? As you know from my speed versus safety blog post, I’m a fan of secure vehicle storage. When I carry a firearm, I carry a 1911 in condition 3. I can separate the magazine from the pistol and put each in a separate secure storage lockbox. This process makes me legal to transport and makes law enforcement interactions much safer. Yes, it will take me several seconds to ready my pistol, but I feel the tradeoff is worth it based on how most civilian DGUs occur. Certain double-action revolvers would make this process a bit harder in a couple of ways:

1. For rimmed cases, like a 44 Special, you have to deal with individual rounds when you remove the rounds from the cylinder. This process is cumbersome.
2. For rimless cases, like a 10mm, you use moon clips that clip the rounds together in a circle, so the process is almost as easy as a magazine.
3. For rimless cases in a moon clip, the width is bigger than a magazine, so you would need a deeper lockbox for your ammo.

In short, for civilians, a double-action revolver with a rimless chambering compares well to a semi-automatic pistol carried in condition 3. Of course, the next question is: What are the advantages and disadvantages if you choose to use a revolver?

1. Advantage: training. You can learn the basics of a double-action revolver quickly. After learning firearm safety, drop the cylinder, eject any rounds, load in your moon clip, shut the cylinder, point, and pull the trigger. Rinse and repeat.
2. Advantage: simplicity. You pull the trigger again if you have a misfire with a double-action revolver. With a semi-auto, it is a process. The process can be practiced and put into muscle memory, but a civilian doesn’t need this complexity.
3. Disadvantage: accessory rails. Many revolvers do not have an accessory rail for a flashlight or a Mantis trainer to help you learn to shoot more accurately. Whether or not that is important to you is an individual’s decision.
4. Advantage: multi-caliber. I used to own a Ruger GP100 in 40 S&W and 10mm. You can practice with cheaper ammunition and more expensive ammunition for self-defense. You, of course, need to compensate or adjust for any point of impact changes. However, you may be perfectly fine for typical civilian distances in DGUs.
5. Advantage: multiple revolvers. If you stick with the same manufacturer, you can have a revolver for hunting, one for home defense, and one for EDC. Your training is the same; everything would be familiar except for the revolver size. If you choose this route, I recommend talking to a reputable gunsmith before purchasing to ensure similar trigger actions. For example, with Ruger, the Super Redhawk and GP100 are more similar than compared to a Redhawk.
6. Advantage: easier gunsmithing. For a civilian, the most important thing you’ll need gunsmithing on is a smooth, predictable double-action trigger pull. But, again, talking to a reputable gunsmith can get you insights on which revolvers can achieve that trigger pull.  
7. Advantage: one can do it all. If God came down and told me I could only have one handgun, I would get a Gemini Custom GP100 in 10mm/40S&W. I would then also chamber it for 10mm Magnum. So now I have a pistol I can confidently carry in the woods of North America with a 10mm Magnum. I have a self-defense pistol using the 10mm. I have a practice pistol using 40S&W. They aren’t three different pistols, just one pistol using different ammunition. Not to mention, I would own one of the finest custom revolvers ever made.

For a civilian, the advantages of a revolver seem to be very clear compared to a semi-automatic pistol. Unfortunately, the pushback always comes from capacity and reloading speed. Unfortunately, I don’t know any statistics to support that assertion for civilian DGUs. In addition, any statistics around the death or injuries of concealed carriers would need to be reviewed. For example, if you were injured by a criminal and you were carrying a semi-automatic pistol, what does that statistic say about your choice of weapon? Should you have been carrying a short-barreled shotgun or AR pistol? Comfort is not an excuse, as you should prepare for the threat. Thus, arguments can be used against your favorite semi-automatic concealed pistol just like they can be used against a revolver.

After decades of hanging out with people who shoot guns, I will lay down an uncomfortable truth: Many people who own semi-automatic handguns do not put in the time and effort to be proficient with them in self-defense if something goes wrong.

Case in point. You discover a violent criminal in your home. You are about 10 feet apart. The criminal is armed with a double-action revolver, and you are armed with your favorite micro semi-automatic pistol. Regarding proficiency with weapons, you and the criminal are identical in every respect. He intends to victimize you. You both pull your guns. Here are two different scenarios:

• Both guns initially misfire.
• Both guns get a round off, but the next round misfires. Note that for a semi-automatic pistol, a few things can happen here where the next round doesn’t go off (e.g., mag not fully seated, jam, or misfire)

The guy with the DA revolver is going to win these battles. He would win even if he were half as proficient as you with a handgun. Even worse, a criminal proficient with a single-action revolver will win these battles against many semi-automatic pistol owners I’ve met.

Is this scenario realistic? Yes. It is much more in line with civilian DGU statistics: you are at home, two rounds or less are fired, and the distance is close.

This fact may be troubling. I understand. It is incredible to put a lot of ammunition downrange quickly, banging steel. When you start getting good, it is addictive fun. As long as everything goes right and you are mentally prepared, you are a formidable adversary against a criminal. But if something goes wrong, you may be incredibly disadvantaged against someone with a more “primitive” handgun.

[note: this post contains some foul language that is relevant for describing a criminal escalation]

The public and its relations with law enforcement (LE) have strained over the last several years. This characterization is mild, as law enforcement officers (LEOs) have been deliberately targeted and killed. A lot of the difficulties with the public stem from unbalanced media representations. Without a doubt, LEOs have engaged in criminal acts against innocents, and they have either gotten away with it or been caught and punished. However, to think that all LEOs are bad is to stereotype a tiny representation as being reflective of the whole. LE has a challenging job, and I don’t think there is enough appreciation in the public’s mind for how difficult it actually is.

I believe as long as LEOs are considered separate from a community rather than a part of it, there will continue to be public relations problems. One of the benefits of living in a smaller community is that you likely know an LEO and their family. Sometimes this has downsides, at least when it did when I was growing up. If I got into trouble as a teenager, my parents usually found out about it before I even got home! 

My book discusses LE interactions extensively, so I’ll be brief here. Two main issues exist for those carrying a concealed firearm (CCF).

1. Do I tell an LEO about my concealed weapon during a traffic stop?
2. What do I say to an LEO after a defensive gun use (DGU)?

I cover the first one in my book, so I’ll skip it here.

Answers for the second item are very controversial. Why? The reason is that self-defense is one side of a DGU coin. The other side of the DGU coin is aggravated assault. The difference between the two is not as secure as you think. I discuss several scenarios in my book where individuals believe they were in a self-defense situation but instead committed aggravated assault. In short, depending on how evidence is conveyed in court, your flipped DGU coin can quickly become weighted to land on aggravated assault. If your DGU-weighted coin lands on aggravated assault, you are looking at felony charges. In addition, some states have extra penalties for gun crimes, such as mandatory prison sentences. In sum, there is a steep price if your DGU coin gets weighted to land on aggravated assault. The only thing worse than that is if you weighted the coin yourself by talking to LE unnecessarily.

People who CCF and are involved in a DGU want clear and concise advice on what to say to LE. Criminal defense attorneys usually have that advice, which is to keep quiet. I keep an attorney on retainer through Attorneys for Freedom, which attorney Marc J. Victor owns. Here is what he says on the topic: https://attorneysforfreedom.com/should-i-talk-to-the-police-if-i-am-arrested-for-a-crime/. The point of view of saying as little as possible to police is backed up by another attorney, James Duane, in a widely seen YouTube video, Don’t Talk To Police, and book You Have The Right To Remain Innocent.

Challenging this view is Massad Ayoob. Ayoob is a veteran LEO, expert witness, author, and someone who has an excellent reputation. I have not read Ayoob’s books but I enjoy his articles when I run across them. His pieces are always thought-provoking, and this one is no exception. The article in question appears in the magazine Combat Handguns March/April 2023 called Silence vs. Loose Lips and starts on page 12.

Preliminaries

Before we get started, let’s clear up a few things:

• Over 80 percent of DGUs happen at home or on the home’s property. Both examples used by Ayoob are home defense examples. I discuss properly preparing the security of your home in my book. An adequately secured home will help prevent intruders, DGUs, and you from having to talk to law enforcement under challenging circumstances.
• James Duane’s book is not about DGUs. It is about innocent people who worsened their lives by talking to LE. It covers a lot of ground, both state and federal. His book is replete with real-world cases that, quite frankly, are heartbreaking. These aren’t one-off stories, either. A not-small percentage of innocent people have been sent to prison, and they only went to prison based on how LE interpreted their statements. These individuals were later exonerated primarily through DNA evidence. This fact should give you pause. I recommend purchasing Duane’s book to get the full impact of those stories.

Why should I worry? I didn’t do anything wrong!

Let’s start by asking: “Why should any civilian be concerned about talking to law enforcement if they did not do anything wrong?” Then, I’ll give two reasons why a civilian should be concerned and back up my statements with quotes from James Duane’s book.

1. LE has no obligation to be honest with you about anything. An LEO can show up at your door, fabricate a story, lie about your loved ones, and wait to hear what you say. James Duane comments:

Even if you are innocent, the police will do whatever it takes to get you to talk if they think that you might be guilty. That includes saying just about anything, no matter how dishonest, to help persuade you that it might be in your best interest to give them a statement. And the courts will generally say whatever they need to say to excuse the dishonesty on the part of the police, even if the courts have to say something that is just as dishonest. […] If a used car salesman engaged in this sort of deception, he would be thrown behind bars. – You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 40). Little A. Kindle Edition.

• Any communication you have with LE can be used to prosecute you but not used for your defense. Furthermore, the prosecution can be selective about what to quote you on and place them out of context. You cannot defend against this in any way, shape, or form. Again, from James Duane:

If you talk to the police for three hours and give them three hundred details that would all tend to support your defense, and you only mention three details that might help get you convicted, the prosecutor has every right under the law to ask the officers to only tell the jury about the three details that seem to implicate you in the crime. – You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 43). Little A. Kindle Edition.

To wrap up this section, let’s have one final quote from James Duane

In other words, talking to the police is at best a no-win situation for someone suspected of committing a crime. – You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 43). Little A. Kindle Edition.

The Dangers of Silence

Ayoob titles his article Silence vs. Loose Lips. Based on the previous section, we can understand the problems with loose lips. Are there any problems with silence? It turns out there are. Let’s hear from James Duane.

In the case of Salinas v. Texas, decided in 2013, the five most conservative justices on the court (the only five appointed by Republican presidents) held for the first time that the silence of a criminal suspect, at least if the suspect is not in custody, is logically relevant evidence that is admissible against the suspect at trial and may be used to help persuade the jury that the suspect is guilty! Those five members of the court agreed that the State of Texas was therefore within its rights to prove and argue that a young man named Genovevo Salinas was probably guilty of a crime because he remained silent when the police asked him a question about it. – You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 93). Little A. Kindle Edition.

What about pleading the 5^th? More problems, unfortunately. More from James Duane:

The same year the Supreme Court decided Salinas, the Department of Justice also helped persuade another federal court in another case that it should be lawful and permissible for a prosecutor to argue that anyone who explicitly asserts the right against self-incrimination is also admitting guilt. – You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 107). Little A. Kindle Edition.

Furthermore:

Even if you take care to say, “I wish to invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination,” you have no guarantee that the agent will not testify months later at your trial that “he said he would not talk because the truth would incriminate him.” – Duane, James. You Have the Right to Remain Innocent (p. 113). Little A. Kindle Edition.  

It is essential to remember for those who are used to watching crime dramas on television or movies that there are usually several months (if not longer!) between your LE conversation and your trial. As a result, the LEO has probably forgotten most of what you said and now has to review some notes that may be good or not.

Now What?

At this point, talking is bad, and being silent is bad. However, Ayoob has a 5-point recommendation if you are in a DGU (taken from the article but abbreviated). He starts when LE is on the scene:

Point 1: Explain the active dynamic, which is what the opponent did to make you use force. […].

Point 2: Confirm that you were the intended victim […].

Point 3: Point out evidence […].

Point 4: Point out witnesses […].

Point 5: Only at that point, request an attorney, cease to answer questions and say something such as “Detective, you’ll have my full cooperation after I’ve spoken with counsel. I wish to speak with an attorney now.”

I recommend something similar in my book. The US Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) also does. Here is what they say (https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/what-to-say-to-911-after-a-self-defense-incident/), which covers more than the 911 call:

1. Identify yourself clearly as the victim of an attack.
2. Clearly communicate who the person was that attacked you, where he or she fled to and if he or she is armed with any weapon, such as a firearm.
3. Follow all police instructions when they arrive on the scene, as it is critical for you to survive that next encounter.
4. Point out any major pieces of evidence that the police need to be aware of, such as the weapon the attacker used that forced you to act in self-defense.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Ayoob’s examples are as relevant as they could be to his or USCCA’s points. Therefore, I will create a fictitious scenario and walk through it with a happy ending. Then, I will take that same scenario and show how it becomes a disaster. I’ll end the fictional parts with a # mark.

DISCLAIMER: I’m not a criminal defense attorney or an LEO. I also did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Therefore, what follows is not legal advice.

You are at home with your wife and baby. You fall asleep, and your wife wakes you up around 1 am and tells you the baby is sick. The baby’s symptoms are very similar to what she had a few months ago, and your wife knows what medicine will do the trick. So you throw on some clothes and head down to a 24/7 drug store about 10 minutes from your house.

As you round the corner to the store, you see two figures outside in the distance. Both appear to be smoking. As you approach, one begins walking to the store entrance, and the other turns and walks a few steps away. You park the car, open the door and step out of the vehicle.

You are rushed by an attacker who uses their body against your car door. The attacker uses the sidewalk’s edge for leverage, and the door crushes one of your legs, immobilizing you. At the same time, another attacker slides up on the car hood and swings a quart beer bottle at your head. Luckily, he missed, and the quart bottle shattered on the top of the car spilling stale beer all over you. The 2^nd attacker is desperately trying to grab your shirt and pull you up so he can punch you out. At this time, you are able to pull your EDC and fire a round at the 2^nd attacker. The 2^nd attacker is hit and falls. The attacker pushing on the door flees. You try and stand but realize your leg may be broken as it cannot support your weight.

Realizing you are especially vulnerable, you get in your car, shut the door, and lock it. You can see the 2^nd attacker motionless on the ground. You cannot see anyone outside the store and decide to call 911. You are trying to remember what to say as the phone is ringing.

#

Here are some 911 options.

Option 1: “There has been a shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. Please send the police.”

Option 2: “I was involved in a shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and the other has fled. Please send the police.”

Option 3: “I was involved in a shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and the other has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. Please send the police.”

Option 4: “My name is John Doe. I was involved in a defensive shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and another one has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. He fled towards Street X. Please send the police.”

Option 5: “My name is John Doe. I was involved in a defensive shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and another one has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. He fled towards Street X. I believe another man that may have been a witness is in the store. Please send the police.”

Option 6: “My name is John Doe, and I have a concealed carry permit. I was involved in a defensive shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and another one has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. He fled towards Street X. I believe another man that may have been a witness is in the store. I am also injured. Please send the police and an ambulance.”

Option 7: “My name is John Doe, and I have a concealed carry permit. I was involved in a defensive shooting at Store Z, at the corner of Street X and Street Y. I was attacked by two men, one is down, and another one has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. He fled towards Street X. I believe another man that may have been a witness is in the store. I am also injured and cannot walk. I am inside my brown car parked in front of the store. Please send the police and an ambulance.”

Write down your preferred option. Then, you can see how it turns out later.  Back to the scenario:

You’ve put your legs in the car (a painful process!), locked the doors, and rolled up the windows. You placed your EDC in the passenger seat. You see LE pull into the parking lot, roll down your window, and place your hands up through the window. The LEO approaches you, their weapon drawn, and asks who you are.

You say: “My name is John Doe, and I have a concealed carry permit. I called 911. I was involved in a defensive shooting. I was attacked by two men, this one is down, and another one has fled. I do not know if the man that fled was armed. He was wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes. He fled towards Street X. I believe another man that may have been a witness is in the store. I am also injured, that is why I am in my car. I can’t stand or walk, but I’m not bleeding. I think my leg may be broken. It got pinned in the door.”

The LEO says: “Where is your weapon, sir?”

You respond: “On the passenger seat.”

The LEO says: “I will need to take possession of it. I’m moving towards the passenger door. Do not move. Unlock it on my command only.”

The LEO takes possession of your firearm. At this time, the LEO tells you to keep your hands up, and the LEO checks out the man on the ground. The LEO comes back and asks for your identification. You provide it, and it checks out. At this point, the LEO asks you about what exactly happened. An ambulance arrives and begins working on the man on the ground. They indicate another ambulance is on the way.

The LEO notices about the smell of beer in the car. You explain that it must have been stale beer from the quart beer bottle the man swung at you. The LEO asks if you mind taking a quick breathalyzer. You agree.

The 2^nd ambulance pulls up, and the LEO says, “For the EMTs to work on you in the car, I’ll need to do a quick search to ensure there are no other weapons. Is that ok?” You say, “Sure.” He begins searching when the EMTs approach your door and ask about your condition. They ask if you can get out of the car with assistance and get on a gurney. You say that you can, and they help you out. The LEO walks over to discuss the attacker’s condition with the EMTs. Other LEOs arrive, and he sends them to talk with the clerk in the store and check around the property.

When the LEO arrives, you are getting ready to be loaded into the ambulance. He says he has a few more questions for you. You tell the officer that, given the circumstances, you need a lawyer, and he’ll have your full cooperation after talking with the lawyer. The LEO respects your decision and leaves you alone.

The day you are released from the hospital, the LEO you talked with shows up. He says they pulled the video from the store, which backs your story. It looks like your attackers were looking to carjack someone that night. They even had a story worked out in advance if things went south. Their friend, who worked at the store, had told them the camera’s recorder was broken, so there wouldn’t be any video. It looks like he was wrong. They were pretty surprised when we showed them the video. The LEO wanted to know if you were willing to testify against your attackers as the attacker you shot would make a full recovery. You say you will testify against them.

#

We see that John Doe did some things right and some wrong, which will happen to most people in a very stressful event such as this attack.

The Twist

In this example, everything is exactly the same except for two things. One, there is no store video; two, you are arrested when you are released from the hospital. This story resumes when you are sitting with the detective (D) in the police station, and the detective is describing the evidence against you (JD).

D: Mr. Doe, I have you as saying one of your attackers was a man wearing a black hoodie, jeans, and white shoes, and fled towards Street X. Is that correct?

JD: I believe that is correct, yes.

D: We apprehended a woman on Street Y. She was wearing a green hoodie, jeans, and gray shoes.

JD: Really? Was she the attacker?

D: Well, she was there. According to her, however, you caused all the problems.

JD: What? Hell, just pull the video from the store.

D: There is no video. The store’s recorder was broken.

JD: What? Look, I was attacked.

D: We talked to the woman and the man you shot separately. Their stories agreed. They said you pulled up and wanted to buy drugs from them. They told you they didn’t sell drugs, and you became belligerent. You called the woman a cunt. Her boyfriend was walking to your car to confront you about it when you pulled your gun. The boyfriend thought you would shoot his girl, so he picked up a beer bottle and tried to knock you out. You shot him instead.

JD: That is total bullshit.

D: Well, it turns out that your breathalyzer reading was about one-third of the legal limit.

JD: Damn – I forgot I had a glass of wine with my wife just before I went to bed. It was just an honest mistake.

D: When you consented to a vehicle search, the LEO found a baggie with half a painkiller.

JD: That is, like, over a year old. When my wife discovered she was pregnant, she wanted to surprise her parents. Unfortunately, I had wrenched my back at work. The only way I could survive the car trip was to take half a painkiller.

D: I take it you have a prescription for them?

JD: Um, no. Someone I know gave one to me so I could make the trip.

D: Well, you know, druggies like to hang out with druggies. Guess what else? That eyewitness you said went in the store, so such an eyewitness existed. No one had purchased anything from the store for half an hour before you arrived.

JD: Look, I saw someone approaching the store’s front. Perhaps he doubled back and was my attacker.

D: Now, the eyewitness is your attacker? Are you sure it was a guy? I mean, you don’t have a stellar record so far.

JD: Look, I don’t quite remember what I said. These are just honest mistakes.

D: Guess what? Everything you said is in the 911 call. That is public information. Do you know what else was in the 911 call? What you said before the operator picked up. If you didn’t know, 911 calls begin recording even before you get connected to an operator. You kept saying to yourself, “What do I say?” repeatedly.

JD: I was trying to remember my concealed carry training regarding 911.

D: Or trying to fake a story.

JD: That is not true!

D: Here is what I think happened. I think you had some wine with your wife, maybe got a little buzzed, maybe got to thinking some painkillers would go good right now. Your baby was sick, and you went out to get medicine, but you realized half a painkiller wouldn’t do the trick that evening. So you approached two people who you thought could sell you some. When they couldn’t, you blew a gasket. The situation escalated, and you ended up shooting someone. To try and cover your tracks, you gave false information to the police and figured the guy you shot would die. You get away free if we don’t find the other witness. That’s why you described the witness completely wrong and even misled us about where she was headed. As you call them, these “honest mistakes” don’t seem so honest, do they?  

#

In the absence of hard evidence, other evidence must be used, and sometimes that could be distorted. For example, depending on the US State, John Doe is looking at serious prison time. When he gets out of prison, his wife may have divorced him, and his kid is calling someone else dad.

In the good version, the hard evidence trumped the other evidence. The LEOs concluded that you simply made some honest mistakes. As a result, a man was reunited with his family, and two criminals were taken off the street. While there are some things they could follow up on with you, there are much bigger fish to fry.

Honest Mistakes versus Lying versus Hiding Something

Looking back on your actions in a stressful situation, you probably didn’t do everything according to the script. It is especially true with ordinary civilians, who probably experienced hardcore violence for the first time.

Who interprets whether something said is an honest mistake or a lie? Well, the LEO does. Therein lies the problem, as it is not objective but subjective. Your LEO can have some of the following characteristics that influence their perception of what you say:

Condition: Fresh, Exhausted

Attitude: Open, Annoyed

Experience: Rookie, Veteran

If an LEO believes you are hiding something, guilty, or lying, they have tremendous power to try and get you to say something incriminating. If you doubt this, read the quotes from James Duane earlier in this post. Duane also points out in his book that once an LEO believes you are guilty, they are subject to confirmation bias. All the evidence they see confirms that you are guilty. Any evidence that does not is discounted. Hard evidence is the only antidote.

What should have happened?

Upon seeing two young people at 1am at a corner convenience store, John Doe should have kept driving and found another store. Violent crime is primarily a young person’s game. Most ordinary civilians are either working (depending on their job) or sleeping at 1 am – they aren’t hanging out smoking in front of a store. Keep in mind a corner store has a lot of ways for your attackers to flee the scene of a crime.

If John Doe felt he had to stop because of his kid, he should have worn a body cam. I discuss these things in my book. Unfortunately, I do not know of any people who CCF and use a body cam – it is not typically discussed. I’m currently evaluating one that may be promising, and I’ll post something on it later if it turns out well. Also, if your state permits it, one-party consent to audio recording allows you to record conversations. So if you don’t want the bulk of a camera, you may still benefit from recorded conversations that could help your case.

However, many civilian violence situations involve an escalation. This fact is why I recommend de-escalation training. You don’t want to be recorded as encouraging the fight. Also, you don’t want to inform LE about your video/audio recording. You’ll be discussing any of your recordings with your attorney.

Lastly, after John Doe told the officer what happened, he should have invoked his constitutional rights. You can read Marc J. Victor’s statement at the link I previously listed for Attorneys for Freedom. You may want to edit out mention of the 5^th amendment based upon what Duane has said, but otherwise, John Doe’s innocence would have been better protected from badly interpreted circumstantial evidence.  

Counterpoints to Ayoob

Ayoob wants to counteract those who did not read Duane carefully and remind them that silence is not your best option. However, he says a few points that I feel are controversial.

Ayoob: “The advice to never talk to the police comes primarily from defense attorneys who know a huge percentage of their clients are guilty as charged […].”

Counterpoint: LE talks to guilty people the majority of the time. Is it not possible that this fact influences their interpretation of the evidence? The more evidence available, the more it may be interpreted as the statements of the guilty: the more statements, the more guilt, even when the person is innocent.

Ayoob: “If an innocent person follows advice for guilty people and acts like a guilty person, they’ll end up with a guilty man’s verdict.”

Counterpoint: In Ayoob’s own example, the silent man spent an “uncomfortably long time behind bars” before getting a hearing. However, he didn’t go to trial and wasn’t convicted even when he was silent. I’m not saying the man took the best approach, but there is a difference between waiting for a hearing and being convicted and going to prison.

Ayoob (quoting from his 1980 book): “Explain to the arresting officers that you’re not a punk taking the Fifth […].”

Counterpoint: You should never feel guilty about involving your constitutional rights. Yes, as Ayoob and Duane point out, there are problems with silence and problems with invoking the 5^th amendment. However, you can use Marc J. Victor’s statement he recommends, but just leave out the 5^th amendment (but keep the other amendments!).  

Duane points out that when LE shoots someone, they invoke their constitutional rights. I doubt that they follow the 5-point plan laid out in the article (but I’m happy to be proven wrong). Duane also points out that LEOs, attorneys, and anyone involved in the legal system tell their children never to talk to LE. If true, this advice contradicts Ayoob’s own points.

Unfortunately, Ayoob’s statements in the article seem to contradict Point 5 of invoking your constitutional rights. After reading the article, one wonders why Ayoob even recommends invoking your constitutional rights. After all, aren’t you acting like a guilty person?

Hopefully, a future article from Ayoob can expand on a few things:

1. Does an LEO follow the 5-point plan if they are involved in a fatal shooting? If not, why?
2. What do LEOs tell their children about talking to LE?
3. Given what was stated in the article, why is Point 5 necessary? What does it prevent?

As you can see from the length of this post, Ayoob’s articles are very thought-provoking and provide great information for ordinary civilians. While I may have some disagreements, they were well worth thinking through.

A helpful way to improve your self-defense preparation is to focus on your likely threat. In my book, I tried hard to eliminate misperceptions and rely on vetted statistics so that the attributes of the threat would be identifiable. Knowing these attributes allows us to prepare appropriately.

For the self-defense industry, the threat a civilian is supposed to prepare for is an armed violent criminal, often pictured as a mass shooter or as a masked man in the bushes or a parking garage. Preparation for this threat can involve the following things:

• High-capacity concealable handguns.
• Multiple magazines for reloads.
• Backup handgun.
• Knife.
• Body Armor.
• Bleeding kit (e.g., tourniquet, clotting agent, gauze, and so forth).

Someone fresh out of concealed carry training may be motivated to go out and buy all these things. However, after a few weeks, it becomes apparent that this amount of equipment is too uncomfortable to pack daily, and work begins on reducing it.

This process is, of course, ridiculous. One prepares for the threat; one does not prepare to be comfortable. In the military, imagine a private telling his commanding officer that carrying a 50 BMG for their mission isn’t going to work for him because it is too heavy to pack. If a 50 BMG is needed to complete the mission and deal with the likely threats you will face, you pack the 50 BMG. Otherwise, you are simply marching to the death of yourself and your team.

The same process occurs with larger caliber handguns. What starts as a desire to have the most powerful handgun a person can conceal is gradually reduced to what recoil the person can handle. When the movie Dirty Harry came out in the 1970s, many people bought S&W Model 29s in 44 Magnum. A couple of years down the road, there was a lot of Model 29s for sale that had only been shot a couple of times. People couldn’t handle the recoil. Again, this process is ridiculous. You should carry the caliber needed to deal with the threat. In fact, you should take everything you need to deal with the threat.

Therein lies the problem. The threat description that seems to be driving many purchases of self-defense equipment looks like this:

• A mass shooter.
• You are a random anonymous target.
• The mass shooter must not know you are carrying, or he will target you first.
• Because the mass shooter will target many people, you will have time to shoot.
• You will need to get as many bullets as possible downrange as accurately as possible.

Has this threat existed? Absolutely. Have armed civilians stopped this threat? Absolutely. Is this threat common? No. For most injurious violent crimes, the victim knows the offender, it happens at a place the victim feels comfortable, and weapons are not used. Defensive Gun Use (DGU) statistics back this up, with over 80 percent of DGUs happening at home and over 80 percent of the time, the firearm is not discharged (i.e., you don’t bring fists to a gunfight).

Furthermore, if God came down and told me that when I’m grocery shopping later today, a mass shooter will be present, and it is up to me to stop him, would I reach for my Every Day Carry (EDC)? Not only no, but hell no. I would be packing something far more appropriate to that situation. If I describe possible and plausible violent crime scenarios to you and you want to use something other than your EDC, you have not prepared for the threat. This fact brings us back full circle.

It appears to me the primary driver for our current generation of concealed carry handguns stems from sensitivity to comfort and sensitivity to recoil. Such developments as the micro compacts, magazine capacity, and the 38 Super Carry seem to be implicated in this approach. Unfortunately, while I appreciate innovative products, I have yet to see hard, real-world data that backs up these product justifications.

My goal here isn’t to dissuade anyone from having an EDC or to discount heroic actions on the part of civilians stopping mass shooters. It is simply to be honest about what we are preparing for and why. So let’s go through some Q&A and drive this point home. I’ll ask the questions, and an experienced concealed carrier will answer them.

Q: What caliber do you carry as your EDC?

A: I carry a 9mm.

Q: Why?

A: I feel the 9mm is the best compromise between capacity and stopping power. With improved bullet technology, I think it is just as good as anything that can be carried as an EDC.

Q: For the sake of argument, let’s assume a cartridge such as the 50 G.I. had the best real-world stopping power in a concealable handgun, available in 1911 Commanders and Glocks. Furthermore, this stopping power was proven in real-world studies of actual shootings. However, the magazine capacity is only seven rounds. Would you switch?

A: No. I have 15 rounds in my magazine. I can quickly put two rounds of 9mm in a torso and be just as effective as one round from that big cartridge. Anyway, didn’t you see John Wick 2? He was pretty concerned when he was given a Kimber with a 7-round capacity!

Q: Fair enough. Do you carry a round in the chamber?

A: Yes.

Q: Why?

A: If I need my weapon, I need it fast. It needs to be ready.

Q: So you have 16 rounds available?

A: Actually, no. I also carry two 15-round magazines, which means I have 46 rounds total.

Q: Why just two? Why not four? I mean, if it is possible that you would need 30 additional rounds, isn’t it possible that you would need 60 additional rounds?

A: I feel 46 rounds is sufficient for anything I may come across. Besides, I carry a knife on the left side, so I don’t have room for extra magazines.

Q: Why do you carry a knife when you have a 9mm and 46 rounds of ammunition?

A: Well, if someone gets close to me and tries to grab my weapon, I can defend myself.

Q: What if they grab your knife first?

A: I would just shoot them!

Q: Given the close range of the attacker, wouldn’t it be better to have a small backup gun, such as a 380 or 25? It will also protect you if your primary gun fails.

A: I honestly don’t want to worry about two different types of ammunition. I feel it is unlikely that my primary gun will fail, and I feel much more comfortable with my knife in such a situation. Besides, if my primary gun fails, I don’t want to run around with an underpowered 25.

Q: Given the close range, if your attacker was armed with a taser, couldn’t he simply tase you and take your EDC?

A: Criminals don’t carry tasers!

Q: For the sake of argument, let’s assume you are up against a criminal, and the distance is 10 feet. The criminal is carrying an S&W Governor. They are using Underwood Ammunition 45 Colt  220 Grain Lehigh Maximum Expansion bullets, but they only have five total rounds. The kicker is that your attacker is wearing level IIIa armor. Assuming your attacker is as fast and as accurate as you, how do you think you’ll come out?

A: Criminals don’t wear body armor!

Q: Mass shooters might.

A: Mass shooters don’t carry five-shot revolvers!

Q: This one does. Five dead people still count as a mass shooting. How do you think you will do?

A: I think I will do fine. First, I doubt he is as accurate with that revolver as I am with my red dot. Also, just because he has body armor doesn’t mean he can get off an accurate shot when bullets are striking him. Once I realize he has body armor, I can aim for the head or pelvis.

Q: There are calibers with known body armor penetration capability. For instance, the 5.7x28mm and the 7.5mm F.K. Do you think one of those would be more appropriate?

A: I think the risk of overpenetration is too great. If a bullet zips through a vest, or worse, through an attacker without a vest, someone innocent behind them can get killed.

Q: What is the difference between overpenetration and a missed shot?

A: What do you mean?

Q: Well, you are prepared to fire 46 rounds downrange. Isn’t it likely that you could be endangering innocents if you miss?

A: Possibly, but more likely, the attacker’s body will be soaking up those rounds, which isn’t going to happen with bullets that can pierce armor.

Q: One option, say with the 7.5mm, is to have three regular expanding rounds, followed by three that can pierce body armor. Would this be a better solution?

A: I don’t think so. The different bullets would probably have different points of impact, and in any case, what if you needed those penetrating rounds first?

Q: Another option may be to have a magazine with rounds that can pierce body armor. A quick magazine swap would handle it.

A: There is nothing quick about a magazine swap. I’ll stick with what I have.

Q: In many social situations, such as grocery shopping, strangers can often get quite close to you. Imagine if a felon knew that you carried a gun. This felon needs a gun but cannot purchase one normally due to background checks. Let’s assume this felon sees you at a lightly attended grocery store. Do you think he may get close enough to knock you out, take your gun, and then claim you fell down and hit your head?

A: Not hardly. I’m extremely aware of my surroundings when I am out in public. So I don’t let anyone get that close.

Q: Even when shopping?

A: Even when shopping.

While this is a fictional dialogue, it is similar to what I’ve encountered. Often, the EDC package someone uses drives what the perceived threats look like, which is the opposite of how it should be. Tiny changes in the threat often expose the weaknesses of the EDC package. However, instead of recognizing that, it usually degrades into cognitive dissonance.

Obviously, you can’t prepare for all threat permutations. However, you can prepare for the more common threats. Unfortunately, what civilians think is common and uncommon is far from the mark. This reason is why I spend so much time in my book analyzing the actual threats civilians face.