TexasCHLforum.com

Hi 5thGen, and welcome to the forum! Yes, we have a great bunch of people here who have come together in a common cause. Glad to have you with us. (I'm 4th Gen myself).

You never need to apologize to us Lonewolf. Your wife maybe but not us.

You give well thought out and logical answers to some tough questions. All I can say is I'm glad you're on my side! (and vice versa)

C-dub wrote:

lonewolf wrote:Tossing a set of cuffs to him and telling him to cuff himself exposes you to having the cuffs thrown back at your face while he lunges at you. You might think you are ready, but your first instinct is to duck. By then he is on you. Although I'm not a LEO, I'll bet LEOs would rather have a partner cuff while they cover, or vice versa. Single handed restraint is very dangerous.

True. Something I hadn't considered.
What was I thinking, injecting logic into a situation that started by someone with a complete disregard for my personal property and safety? My bad!

No C-dub.....your good! Had you not asked that question, we might not have received this invaluable input that we have. As far as I'm concerned, this is stuff I need. Excellent question sir. And excellent answers and thoughts forum members!

We come here to learn about things like this happening to us, and what to do when it does, and we all jump in and give an opinion, and we learn. This is the essence of this forum. Thank you everyone !

C-dub wrote:

joe817 wrote:In this scenario, distance is your friend. Coming into close proximity, or to even have contact in any form with the b.g., could give him an opportunity that could go horribly wrong for you.

Exactly. That's why I was wondering if getting the BG to secure himself would be a more acceptable option. If he didn't want to I could argue that if he did we could both relax just a little bit and that might prevent him from getting shot. If he's already tossed his weapon he might see the logic in this and comply.

C-dub, you are entirely a reasonable man. But we'd be dealing with someone who has an entirely different mindset than you and I. Trying to reason, or converse/convince someone to do something that is probably totally contrary to the mindset of the b.g. would only lead to a "conversation"....something that could be distracting. Distraction is a ploy used very effectively used by everyone. In this instance, ANY distraction could lead to disastrous consequences.

Of course this is how I would handle it......or how I envision I'd handle it. I wouldn't want to say 2 words to that person...not 2 words. I think(and it's only my opinion) that ANYTHING that takes my 100% focus on keeping the b.g. subdued until the calvary shows up, only works to my detriment. I really wouldn't want to handle it any other way, considering my lack of specific training....just keep my distance, with my sights on him, and my finger on the trigger, until help arrives.

IAMAL, YMMV, and one has to work out what is best for him/her under the circumstances. What I've said above would work for me.

It just makes sense to me, that unless you are specifically TRAINED in subdue tactics, that once you have the "drop" on the b.g. the next thing would be to tell him to just lie on the ground, spread eagle with your sights trained on him, and just wait it out for the professionals to come in and do what they are trained to do. And if b.g. is stupid enough to challenge you, be far enough away from them to be able to "stop the threat" immediately.

In this scenario, distance is your friend. Coming into close proximity, or to even have contact in any form with the b.g., could give him an opportunity that could go horribly wrong for you.

Just my 2 cents worth.

NAVY CHIEF wrote:This is why I like this forum as opposed to other CCW/CHL ones. They NEVER get back to you, but y'all always do! I love it! Thanks to all respondents so far and in the future - you truly are the best shooters a friend could ask for!

Hooyah!

NAVY CHIEF! But what sets us off from other forums, is that we are Texans, united in a common cause.