“The Perth Amboy Police Department does not recommend that citizens fight with any suspect who produces any type of weapon.” – Perth Amboy PD official statement, Fearful of being shot, victim grabs gun from robber [at nj.com]
“The Perth Amboy Police Department does not recommend that citizens fight with any suspect who produces any type of weapon.” – Perth Amboy PD official statement, Fearful of being shot, victim grabs gun from robber [at nj.com]
Of course not, no monopoly wishes to introduce competition. Even outside of a true monopoly, suppliers of goods and services discourage potential customers to do it themselves.
I agree; the only time I would be in serious danger from a criminal would be if I threatened their main source of income, like a drug gang and I was filming their illegal activity; then the criminals would overcome their natural tendency to avoid a person who can effectively defend themselves.
The government wants to have a monopoly of force; armed citizens are a threat to that monopoly and the local government gang will use whatever the citizens allow them To enforce that monopoly. So you get CA and NYC and the ongoing efforts at the federal level for more gun control.
There’s a custom kydex holster manufacturer here in Philly who makes YouTube videos teaching people how to make what he sells. Great products though. If you’re in the market for a minimalist kydex holster, give Phlster a look, they’re good
Uhhh, what?
Sad part is, there will be those that take their “advice”.
And that, my friend, is called “Natural Selection.”
The statement and whole idea is ridiculous. Natural rights aside, what if what they want is unlawful carnal knowledge of your female companions?
I believe the phrase tough shit applies here at least in the police’s point of view. They’d tell you to just let him and if he asks for you to help hold her you damn well better. Remember kids do whatever the scary man asks…
(Kinda sarcastic there but I really would not put it past them.)
I wonder if the Perth Police are willing to orally service perps or take it in the bum? That should be the question posed to the bloaks.
These “Perth” guys are more “fuggedaboudit” than “Ozzian”. A bum is what they throw out, as in “Throwduhbumowd!” “Pitch” and “catch” are more their style.
Cooperating with an armed assailant may in fact be the best way to avoid being killed…and it may not be. Only the victim can make that decision at that time. To simply give the blanket advice, “never fight back” is absurd.
Nope.
According to the British Home Office, you are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:
*Resisting with a gun 6%
*Did nothing at all 25%
*Resisted with a knife 40%
*Non-violent resistance 45%
Using a gun us 5x safer than cooperating
I said it may be the best way to avoid being injured/killed. The vast majority of people who are attacked do not have a firearm on their person. Using your own statistics, such a person has a 25% chance of being injured if they do nothing, but a 45% chance of being injured if they resist “non-violently”, whatever that means (in context, I suspect it means resisting without the aid of a weapon).
The obvious takeaway is that carrying a concealed firearm is very effective. Fighting back when one doesn’t have a gun? It gets more complicated, doesn’t it?
got a citation on those figures? Not that I doubt you, but it would be useful in a debate.
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.1/gun-facts-5.1-screen.pdf
Page 28
Absolutely correct.
Anyone who has read the FBI UCR can see this. The more force you use to meet any criminal attack, the better your outcome likelihood is. Introducing armed resistance shows a big improvement in outcomes for the victims of crime.
This is where Ruark’s admonition of “use enough gun” becomes not just a watchword for African game hunters.
yes, lets all be a nation of victims and allow criminals to run rampant in our streets and get away with murder. great advice, keep it up. (insert sarcasm tag here)
Since so many here at TTAG are newcomers to the RKBA fight, I feel it incumbent upon me to tell people that we’ve seen this mush-for-brains nonsense out of cops from sea to shining sea for about three decades now.
Back in 1993, Jeffery Snyder, a lawyer in DC, wrote the seminal essay, “A Nation of Cowards,” which you can find reproduced in various places including here:
http://www.rkba.org/comment/cowards.html
I should NB that Jeff Chan, some others from Silicon Valley, and I used to go to San Francisco on a regular basis to learn from the wisdom and wit on Don Kates on the legal foundations of RKBA. I’ve long since lost contact with Jeff, but he is someone people should know has been in the RKBA fight for a long time as well. When you see Jeff’s name on stuff, know that Jeff is the Real Deal.
Snyder’s essay provoked response, especially from the well-coiffed Georgetown/DC wine and croissant circuit. George Will’s response is below:
http://www.tact1.net/Articles/Article_Will.pdf
Now, as to the “give the criminal what he wants” twaddle:
I should make sure people understand that this wasn’t peddled by old-time cops whom I knew growing up (guys who were WWII/Korean vets – most of whom have passed on now). No way – they would tell people, to their faces, “get a gun,” then they’d often help people a) choose a gun, b) tell people where they could get instruction in handling and safe use of guns (and many of these courses would be run by cops in their off-duty hours) and c) how to handle intruders and criminals before the cops got there. Many cops would do this on their own time, on their own dime. They were part of the community, and they viewed training and arming “their people” in their neighborhoods as a moral duty. They knew that they couldn’t be everywhere, and that in the time it took the cops to respond, people were on their own. Back then, the cops also had an “us and them” mentality… except the “us” were the cops and law-abiding citizens; their neighbors, the kids in the neighborhood, the old folks who needed looking after… and “them” – the criminal scum who sought to prey on “us.”
Back in those days, the gun cops recommended came in only about three flavors: S&W .38 Special, 1911 in .45 ACP or Colt Python in .357. There were no Euro-weenie pistols made of compressed cheez-whiz. Very few people kept a long gun for home defense. I knew one guy who had a M1 Carbine under his bed (and he had cause to use it), but he was a Korean vet and that carbine was his issue weapon in the USA. For the vast majority of people, it was the era of wheelguns for home defense. Back in the late 60’s, early 70’s, if you called the cops, it wasn’t on 911. There was no “911.” The cops knew it could be a long time getting there. They’d tell you “make sure he’s inside the door… then let him have it. As long as you don’t touch anything and the evidence shows he was inside your business or house, we’re going to write it up as self-defense, help you clean up and that’ll be that.” And it was – even in NY or NJ.
Starting in the late 70’s and early 80’s, a new breed of cop started showing up: the professional political syncophant, who cravenly curried favor with the new, left-wing radicals that were taking over American urban politics. Gone were the legendary cops like Jimmy Cirillo and his buddies from the NY Stakeout Unit, who were quite happy to define “going home at the end of my shift” as “and the criminal went to the morgue before I clocked out.” The Stakeout Unit was disbanded because the vast majority of criminals they dropped in the act of robbing stores were black and hispanic. The era of racial pandering had begun.
In NYC alone, things became so bad that during the absurdly stupid administration of one David Dinkins, (Democrat, of course, but the city’s first black mayor) his “solution” to auto burglary was to tell people to put signs on their dashboards, politely telling thieves that there was no stereo in the car. Dinkins and his cronies also advised people to carry “mugger money,” the odd $20, to give to muggers on demand so that they’d leave you alone after that.
I shit you not. The official advice was to put a sign in your car and carry cash for muggers.
All the while, the cops in NYC went along with this stupidity, peddling the same twaddle that Dinkins was spouting, even when it was laughable and stupid twaddle. Anyone who had any lick of sense knew what Dinkins was saying was nonsense on stilts, but the cops went along with it, hook, line and sinker.
Variants of this position were promulgated throughout the 80’s in most of the major urban areas of the US, and the cops became the footsolders of the urban leftists’ gun control agenda.
They say once you’ve lost someone’s trust, you can never fully regain it, and so it is with me and cops. As soon as cops started becoming willing (and in many cases, eager) spokesmen for the urban gun control agenda, spouting nonsense like “give the criminal what he wants,” I’ve never viewed cops as worthy of my trust ever again.
Well it appears as though victimhood is mandatory in Australia… wonder where it’ll catch on next.
The article is about Perth Amboy N.J., not Perth, Australia.
In the words of Mater… Awe Dang. Sorry thought they meant Australia I was almost certain no cop in the U.S. could be that dumb… sadly I stand corrected…
The majority of NJ is nodding their heads in complete agreement.
This is the same kind of logic which says that pumping a shell into the chamber of your shotgun will make an intruder pee his pants.
I don’t believe its quite the same kind of logic, but its in the same general vicinity. There’s a whole lot of “don’t give away your position panic,” but the fact of the matter is that 90 % of normal people are sleeping in their beds at 3 am. That’s where my position was, and it’s probably where you are as well. If someone racks a shotgun, or checks the load status on a revolver or semi, that could make enough noise which could give away the home defender’s position. Still, I daresay an armed home defender in their own home is a good bit more prepared that an arrogant liberal ninny approaching the realization that unarmed defense in the midst of a hostile presence is a terrible plan.
The arrogant liberal ninny view:
Armed assailant = bad
Armed defender = bad
Armed assailant + armed defender = bad X 2
Better to just have single bad. Besides, when we give up our guns, the bad guys won’t need guns and robberies will become simple peaceful exchanges. Doesn’t common sense tell us that simple, peaceful exchanges, rather than armed robberies, would be really, really nice? We just don’t get it.
The whole ides behind THIS homeowner revealing his position is “Come on in and GET SOME.” And don’t plan on me being where you heard me just now – I can move in darkness.
I hate news stories like this- if they say “yes, we recommend you fight,” then someone might sue the city if they get hurt fighting. If they say “yes, we recommend you get a gun and defend yourself,” then someone might sue the city if a youth in their family dies while attempting to supplement his college scholarship with armed robbery.
Because, you know, he was just turning his life around, and he was a good father, and his friends say he didn’t deserve to die over a wallet and cellphone, and why is it we don’t get rid of these stupid stand your ground laws so people don’t feel entitled to just murder misunderstood youths?
And if you think liability is a ridiculous concern, I have three words for you. McDonald’s coffee cup.
Yep, this is pretty much a non story.
I think the real story here is that the chemical and petroleum dump known as Perth Amboy has a Police Department.
That may be true, but the police administration really believes that you should lay down and take it. They also believe they should be the only ones armed.
The cops I know don’t believe you should “just lay down and take it”. They just have to say that for liability sake,unfortunately.
Seriously.
Imagine the uproar if the cops officially said “Good for you! Everyone should try to disarm their mugger.”
Nonstory. Liability. Lawyers.
From the article, the victim did it exactly right (sans gun). Don’t fight for you life over property ($30), but if it looks like they now what your life (racking the gun as if getting ready to shoot), fight like crazy with speed, suprise, and violence of action. Well done!
What happens when someone complies and it isn’t enough and the perps take their lives. There is no guarantee that complying with criminals will keep anyone from being killed or seriously injured.
The Muslims got this one right:
A man asked the Prophet Muhammad “What about if a man came to me asking for my money (meaning to take it by force).” The Prophet said: “Don’t give him your money.”
So the man said: “What if he fights me?” The Prophet said: “Fight him back.”
The man asked: “What if he kills me?” The Prophet said: “Then you are a martyr.”
The man asked: “What if I kill him?” The Prophet said: “Then he is in the hell-fire.” Because he is a transgressing oppressor.
And the Prophet said: “Whoever is killed defending himself is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his family is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his property is a martyr.”
…yeah and Mussolini ordered the trains to run on time and Hitler hired some good tailors to make some snappy clothes.
I don’t take life advice from a pedophile and mass murderer.
No they didn’t. That only applies to them and not us infidels. Mohammad’s followers is one of the reasons I am armed to the teeth.
I wonder if the Perth fire department has a similar policy. Just let it burn and wait for the professionals. Don’t go risking your life with that fire extinguisher.
…they probably don’t recommend people go charging into a fire to save the TV.
TV? You can be prevented from trying to save more precious things than that.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/07/missouri-police-stun-stepdad-trying-to-save-son-from-fire-1637542212/
To be fair, the firefighters were there and had already tried, but still…
In this case the robber was stupid enough to bring a projectile weapon into melee range, and have that weapon not be a real gun. Victim’s still lucky the four guys didn’t just beat the shit out of him, but I guess they were new at this whole robbing thing. But I love that so many people scoff at the police advice as if they’re commandos who have been trained to take down tangos with nothing but a toothpick. Sure, it depends on the situation, but disarming someone isn’t easy or safe, and it’s a lot simpler for them to pull the trigger. I’ve read a few news stories where the victim got splattered because he wouldn’t give up the money… or kicks, or some stupid jacket. If all they want is money, the smart move is to give it up. If they seem to want something else, reevaluate (like this guy said he did).
Of course, some of these robbers wouldn’t get that close if NJ wasn’t so draconian with anti-gun laws.
Just piss yourself and shout “Im pregnant!”
Ive been using that tactic for everything from needing to leave work early and not wanting to visit the in-laws to getting out of speeding tickets and safe passage down dark alleys.
Its amazing how much space people give a bearded 200 pound 6 foot man with a pee stain on his trousers shouting “Im pregnant!”
That police advice has changed my life.
And the lives of those around you.
Next time use contraception. 😎
Hell, I wouldn’t recommend it, either! But sometimes trouble finds you, and you gotta do what you gotta do.
If someone tries to attack me with any kind of weapon there wont be a fight just a body
Will you be leaving a good looking widow with a large insurance settlement to grieve your loss?
IMHO, it all depends on the situation and your training & confidence. Self defense training that includes how to forcibly disarm an attacker is essential, especially in robberies where they have a gun pressed against the back of your head or back. Practicing drawing from a concealed holster with a variety of clothing. If someone has drawn their gun on you already at very close range, and if you have the right training, you are better off attacking them with a disarmament technique than just drawing your own weapon. If nothing else the attack will create space and give you time to draw your weapon. For home invasions it helps to have a plan that takes advantage of hallways, stairs, and other things that could cause a fatal funnel on your invaders.
The cops are also committing the error of ignoring the unseen consequences. The choice to resist has consequences beyond attacker and defender. Regardless of the outcome, that attacker, and any would-be attacker hearing of the resistance, are dissuaded from future attacks.
( . . . and don’t give me the simpleton response of: “well, next time, the attacker will shoot first, if he knows people will resist.” That choice was available this time and the attacker didn’t take it. If shooting each mugging victim were an effective means of mugging, muggers would already be doing it.)
The contrapositive is also important: a victim who chooses to be a victim endangers the rest of us by incentivizing violence–another unseen consequence. This is what I say to “peace loving” “non-violent” opponents of concealed carry: “by making yourself vulnerable, you have harmed me by making it more likely that I will be attacked and that I will have to kill my attacker. It is your choice and your lifestyle that encourages violence, not mine.”
If a mugger gets away without harming the victim, they know that there will little to no effort by the police to investigate the crime beyond name and address. Assault gets more attention, and murder will have (where I live) thorough investigation with a much higher chance of arrest. Murder and assault, they come after you, simple robbery, meh.
That does not mean you should lie down, because some thugs don’t do a self risk assesment of their actions. The victim must.
I’ve mentioned this before. If I lived in NJ and was unable to aquire a gun permit and found myself in a DGU situation, it would also turn out that I took the gun from my attacker. I would have no explaination for why the criminal was carrying two guns.
One of them would be an inexpensive Taurus.
You do what you have to do but, it seems to me that the likelyhood of being caught “illegally” carrying a firearm is probably much greater than the probability of needing it. So then the New Jerseyite (or New Yawker, or Cali dude,….) has to do the mental risk calc factoring the possible outcomes of being robbed (or worse) vs. being prosecuted, jailed, and losing their 2A rights forever.
Seems that our Constitution, if properly applied, would eliminate the need for this mental calculation.
That should be an easy sell since we’re told all the time that one reason for not carrying a gun is that the bad guy will take it away and shoot you with your own gun.
In fact, this would probably be like some deadly game of hot-potato with the gun changing hands so rapidly that the very laws of physics would be defied. You would, in effect, have a perpetual motion machine.
If thousands of said pairs of assailants and victims could be wired in series, and if the guns were magnetized, they could generate enough electricity to lead to an age of energy independence.
You sir, will be a hero of this new age!
The Vikings had a law that if you were robbed and did not do everything within your power to stop the attacker, you were held responsible for his next victim.
Now that would put a different twist in things here, now wouldn’t it?
“Evil flourishes when good men do nothing.”
– Edmund Burke
“Run from a knife. Rush a gun.”
– Jimmy Hoffa
And where did that get him? (if only we knew….)
The citizens of Perth Amboy recommend that the Police Department STFU and let the people have firearms for own protection.
My advice is that the Perth Amboy police-boys get rid of their guns and badges, and go work at a local shopping mall cutting hair.
Is there a rule in NJ that cop uniforms be SS butch?
Those dress outfits do look SS butch.
Sure, I’ll give them what they want. If I’m guaranteed no harm will come to myself or anyone I care about during the encounter (including emotional distress) and everything that is taken is replaced by the PD within 6 hours.
No? Then no.
And the 4th. part of the government is WE THE PEOPLE (the vote, and Jury duty). Our 2A duty is Military defense of the Bill of Rights. Hunting is not a right. Self-defense is a God given right. Our duty is also to keep order and protect the helpless. Looking like RAMBO is not helpful to our cause… Much of this goes right back to George Washington and his military orders , Like not wearing a hat in doors, Why? HE is stating a higher moral order. A society that is orderly. You can have all the guns you want and types.. The point is to not have a land with no law and order… And open carry is a duty. not Hollywood dress up time…
If you have no self defense training and you don’t know anything about the use of weapons, then I can see how their advice would be solid.
Even with training, I’d be more inclined to acquiesce a request for my wallet, phone, or car keys than to try and swipe away a firearm or knife, just because I really don’t think that any of those things are worth my life. The time to start fighting back is when the criminal says, “Come with me” or starts trying to rape me.
“No no, it’s ok, I won’t fight back. You can rape me and then carve the pentagram on my stomach. I’ll just lie here; the police will be on their way, I’ll be just fine. Seriously, go ahead, have your fun.”
I used to drive through perth amboy, in the morning its mostly methadone zombies waiting for the clinics to open, and at night its overrun by gangsters.
Comments are closed.