The original post is FAR more credible than Reno 911 or a fairy tale and has merit. Those are not good comparisons.
Lessons you can learn, or be reminded of are:
Don’t limit yourself to proficiency in one technique.
Train to proficiency though!!!
Letting perps within five feet of you will severely disadvantage you when your weapon is holstered, only luck will allow you a clean draw uninterrupted.
Remember the 21 foot rule, this situation could have been avoided if it was adhered to.
How was he supposed to avoid coming within 21’ of his aggressors? As I read the tale, two of them jumped out of a van. Maybe it just depends on where you live, but around here there is no way to keep 21’ away from every other human being.
Learning to fight someone who is within 5’ makes a lot more sense than operating under an assumption that you’ll be able to keep all of the “perps” from getting that close.
If two guys, obviously up to no good, come up behind me to five feet, my gun will be out already. That is the rule. They “walked” up behind him to the distance of five feet.
Read up on the 21 foot rule. It just means have your gun out before they close the distance. Something he should have done in this situation.
I’m quite familiar with the 21 foot rule, its history, and the myriad ways (both right and wrong) folks try to apply it. I’ve demonstrated both live fire and with Simunition that it’s “beatable” but that for many folks it’s not nearly a long enough distance given practical dynamic events.
Putting that aside … ok, I’ll grant you that you wouldn’t let two guys who are obviously up to no good (your words) get that close to you and behind you if you could help it. But that fails to address the countless situations where someone might already be that close and behind a person before his “they’re obviously up to no good” spider-sense kicks in.
If one’s mindset and one’s training are based on the fantasy that BGs can only get within 21’ if you fail, someone is in for a very unpleasant surprise.
Bad guys don’t typically come at you snarling like a pit-bull with a bad attitude. They try to close distance with you while appearing harmless…and THEN they spring the trap.
Yes, if you’re really paying attention you can spot them trying to set you up…but not always.
Like Todd said…the 21 foot rule is a guideline to help with decision making in a lethal force encounter…not a rule that mandates keeping any and all strangers at least 21 feet away from you at all times.
Incidentally, this is a great argument for the backup gun. The other night some dude who was in an out of state car with only one plate on it with a few of his homeboys started to approach me at the gas station as I was filling up on my way home from the gym. The minute I saw him look at me I put my right hand in my pocket. Turns out he wanted to try and sell me some cologne. To him I looked nice and relaxed…perhaps even friendly. What he didn’t know was that my right hand was on the grip of my Smith & Wesson 442 and I’d already picked the spot on his chest I was going to aim for (fake Gold MJ leaf from a cheap chain) if I needed to shoot him. Now most of the time when strangers approach me it isn’t to do me harm so it’s not really appropriate to go into the obvious make-my-day-punk hand on the gun pose. With the 442 in the pocket I can look perfectly casual and still be prepared for unpleasantness should it happen.
I was out for lunch one day when I saw my best friend’s wife backing away from a…well…undocumented worker in the parking lot of store. She looked extremely uncomfortable. I was instantly curious and decided that I should investigate. I walked over and struck up a conversation with the south of the border close talker. From my limited understanding of spanish and his broken English I managed to discern that he was trying to get directions to the hospital because his brother had been rushed there in an ambulance after an on the job accident. Later my buddy called and thanked me for looking out for her. “She said she was scared but you were your usual calm self, just standing there with your hand in your pocket.”
If they only knew…
Yeah, thanks for all the great advice. I’ll keep that in mind like a good noob.
Meanwhile, I was discussing lessons that you could learn from the story and why it was a valid read. I am sorry that I pointed out certain things that you failed to catch and thus put you on the defensive.
Easy, man…
This isn’t the kind of board where posts = expert and new guy = dumbass (though the many of the top posters here do know their stuff), but let folks get a chance to know you before you get bent out of shape about how they react to your advice.
Now, on topic, I’m not a tactical guru or close to it, but I know if I drew my gun everytime I was within 21’ of a shady looking character I’d be the one getting arrested…
But you could certainly write up a make-believe story where it did, and then you could learn a lesson from it. 
You may want to check the attitude a bit there, dude. Vigorous debate is perfectly acceptable here. Making it personal won’t be popular or tolerated.
Good read.
Could someone provide some insight on this quote: “Thou Shalt not Murder” is
different from “Thou Shall not Kill”.
? Thanks!
Basically a translation error that made it into the modern bible.
From Wiki:
Killing or murder?
Multiple translations exist of the sixth commandment; the Hebrew words לא תרצח are variously translated as “thou shalt not kill” or “thou shalt not murder.” Older Protestant translations of the Bible, those based on the Vulgate and Roman Catholic translations usually render it as “Thou shalt not kill,” whereas Jewish and newer Protestant versions tend to use “You shall not murder.” There is controversy as to which translation is more faithful, and both forms are quoted in support of many opposing ethical standpoints.
The Vulgate (Latin) translation has Non occides, i.e. “Thou shalt not kill.” English translations using “kill” include the King James (Authorised) (1611) [although note Matthew 19:18 “do no murder,” following the Vulgate non homicidium facies], the American Standard (1901) and Revised Standard (American Protestant, 1952) Versions. Almost all Roman Catholic translations, including the Douay-Rheims Bible (1609/1752), the New American Bible (1970), the New Jerusalem Bible (1985) and the Christian Community Bible (1986), have “kill.” Martin Luther (German, 1534) also uses töten (kill).
Protestant translations using “murder” include the New International Version (American, 1978), New American Standard Bible (American, 1971), New English Bible (British Protestant, 1970), and the New King James (American, 1982), New Revised Standard (American, 1989) and English Standard (American Protestant, 2001) Versions. Jewish translations almost all use “murder,” including the Jewish Publication Society of America Version (1917), the Judaica Press tanach (1963) and the Living Torah (1981). A Jewish exception to this pattern is the Artscroll or Stone Edition tanach (1996).
The Old Testament’s examples of killings sanctioned by God are often cited in defense of the view that “murder” is a more accurate translation. Additionally, the Hebrew word for “kill” is הרג (harog), while the Hebrew word for “murder” is רצח (retzach), which is found in the Ten Commandments לא תרצח (lo tirtzach). In the fullness of the Old Testament Exodus 20:13 is abundantly evidenced as prohibiting unjust killing, rather than a universal injunction against all killing, as retzach is never used in reference to the slaying of animals, nor the taking of life in war, while its most frequent use is in reference to involuntary manslaughter and secondarily for murderers.
Would be cool if somebody could verify this story. Can’t happen that often.
Been mugged at gun point by 2BG in the presence of three ladies and two buddies, not a lot of fun. I got letters for a while telling me when Byron was up for parole again. All worked out fine.
True, not true, whatever. I think the real thing is that your spidey senses will go off, if it is anything more than a blind corner ambush. My buddies and I knew something was going to go down and were trying to get the ladies into their car and on their way. Luckily they were at least buttoned up in their car when they got to us. 30 seconds in the local security came around the corner in a car and made them flee. (I think they had been watching the perps and used us as bait.)
Afterwards, the girls said that they had no idea that we were about to be hit. Amazing. I guess the thing I learned is that if you know, and the bad guys know what is going on, you might as well let everyone else in on it. That and to break their plan, hell, cluck like a chicken, throw them a variable.
Even got my wallet back. Who robs kids coming out of McGrurks in Soulard at closing time? I was bumming drinks by 10:30.
Byron’s court appointed defense attorney ended up being in the same fraternity as me and my buddies, different chapter. In Hoc. ACLU would love that. Didn’t even go to trial.
The only thing about his story that rings funny is that he started shooting early, probably just in time though. 4v1 with a good outcome is better than Tom Cruise did in Collateral.
$18k and your gun back, that’s cheap for saving your life.
Added: The more I think about it, the more I think it is BS.
It may be true, just getting that sense again that somethings not right.
It’s called the 21-foot RULE and not the 21-foot LAW for a reason. Not everyone in every situation can maintain that type of a cushion. I have been in a situation where I was surrounded by thousands of concert-goers making their way out of a stadium. There was no way I could maintain anything more than a few inches of separation.
I felt like a tiny pebble in the middle of a raging river. The best I could do was observe the ones who were closest to me and proactive pro-active retention techniques.
When I started reading this I thought it reminded me of an IDPA scenario. You know, one of the ones printed in Handguns or one of those places.
I agree with EdL.
I don’t know why either, but that’s the exact same reaction you have sometimes.
M_P
Your Delta Tau Chi pledge name is … Rockstar.
Has anyone talked with the founder of the 21 foot rule…Dennis Tueller?
He’ll tell you himself, and I quote…“It would be safe to say that an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone.”
Can a person get 2 shots on target before someone closes the distance of 21 feet?
Unless one of the shots goes in the snot locker, the person can live quite awhile to do damage on you, if determined enough.
21 feet is too close. If the subject has a knife, you will get cut. If you’re in a fair fight, you’re in the wrong place. Who wants to get cut?
Most of the testing I’ve seen places the distance more in line with 35+ feet.
But all this depends on you, your equipment and your proficiency with it.
The problem in the bigger cities is that the prosecuting attorneys are always eager to take anybody who uses a gun to trial…even if they are 100% right and legal. Street cops are all too familiar with this situation because those same overzealous attorneys like to prosecute any cops that they can. Overzealous prosecutors are predominant in liberal controlled areas like San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York and so on. In addition to local prosecutors it is very possible that state level and federal prosecutors who are also overzealous will also try to railroad an honest citizen or cop with the catch-all of “a civil rights violation.” Let’s also not forget that sometimes the local prosecuting attorneys will make a deliberate effort to try to “prosecute their case in the media” too. In other words, the overzealous prosecutor will make open statements about how good his case is against Joe Citizen or Joe Cop. They will give interviews about “how they developed their trial case” and so on. What makes this man’s situation very interesting is that in some areas there are laws against malicious prosecution or overzealous prosecution. He has to make an effort to take the abusive prosecutor to court in either a criminal manner and/or as a civil rights violation of some sort. One of the key problems with prosecuting an attorney is trying to find another attorney who will do the job. In other words, imagine one shark attacking another shark to defend a badly wounded person. It ain’t gonna happen. There is also the option that the man who was attacked could possibly file a complaint against the overzealous prosecutor with a professional standards board in some capacity but generally not much comes of that. Again, it’s like an attorney being brought in front of a review board of his fellow attorneys. And that is also probably not the best way to go either but it could be a possible option to think about or pursue in some fashion…
It was at less than 10’, 5’ I believe. I have a very keen BS detector (I make a hobby out of exposing internet phonies on gun boards) and I find the story believable.