Category: equipment

Pepper spray or handguns

Posted by Mostly Genius – August 1, 2009

I found Conservative Scalawag had linked to my post about pepper spray, and I think his post exemplifies what people do not understand about pepper spray and use of force in general.

While yes, pepper spray does have its place in the self-defense arena, it would not be my first choice.

Until we have a scenario we can’t make any judgements about what our choices should be. Leaving is generally my first choice, but even that isn’t always viable. There is no “pepper spray or gun” argument, because they fill different roles.

Yet, Mostly Genius believes that pepper spray can fulfill the non-deadly force niche.

There isn’t a “non-deadly force niche”, there are several. Pepper spray fills the niche right before we start striking people because if we can solve the problem at that level we will not have any need to escalate further.

Thing is, criminals are not going to tell you if their intent is deadly, or if they just want your watch. Therefor, you must treat all incidents with bad guys as possibly life-threatening to you. Sorry, but not a mind reader.

(Emphasis mine)
All incidents are potentially life threatening, but the law requires that we have an immediate and credible threat to our lives (or a third party) before we can apply deadly force. Again there is no “pepper spray or gun” argument. Deadly force is the correct response to lethal threats, but we can’t pretend that all threats are lethal or that “potential” is the same as “actual.”

However, I will admit there are times pepper spray comes with me. Those are the times when I cannot carry a gun,due to silly rules, or Byzantine rules. Otherwise, I carry a gun, and with the full intent of using it to STOP the bad guys from victimizing me or my family.

Keeping in mind that pepper spray is basically a step above strong language, it is not a suitable handgun replacement. Pepper spray fills an entirely different role than firearms do. The perfect role for pepper spray is reinforcing a verbal command. We can pepper spray belligerents for continuing to approach when told to stop, it would be very hard to justify shooting them.

For while pepper spray may work a certain percentage, guns, when used properly, work 100% of the time.

Without quibbling about proper use, guns certainly do not work 100% of the time or anything approaching it. Most criminals do quit without any shots being fired, but some require multiple good hits to be put down and those criminals sometimes inflict a lot of injury and trauma before they finally do stop. I certainly agree that handguns are better fight stoppers than pepper spray, but we can’t use handguns in the same situations where we could use pepper spray.

Even more pepper spray

Posted by Mostly Genius – July 23, 2009

So after this post about pepper spray and the commentary here it seems like a lot of people are still not getting my point.

Using less lethal in deadly force scenarios. Nobody would choose to fight a knife wielding attacker with their fists if they had anything else available. Seeing as how fist fighting is more force than pepper spray, clearly pepper spray is not the answer to deadly force attacks.

Bypassing less lethal tools in deadly force scenarios. There is a lot of confusion about the use of force continuum. Law enforcement has been addressing this in their training for at least a decade: it’s not a ladder and you don’t have to touch every rung. A lethal threat warrants a lethal response. An escalating situation (as most are) provides room for stopping the fight before it becomes a deadly force encounter.

Liability of not using less lethal in deadly force scenarios. This theory that having pepper spray and not using it in a deadly force situation is going to somehow expose you to more legal liability is totally spurious. This is like saying you better not take a martial art, because you will be expected to use some ninja move instead of your firearm. I don’t shoot because I don’t know how to do anything else, I shoot because my training has told me that this is only appropriate response to the circumstance.

Pepper spraying people is trivial. Especially in comparison to shooting people. If you can effect a stop with pepper spray then you aren’t going to be justifying your shooting in court. This is the most likely case: bad guy gets sprayed and quits. Some people are trying to optimize their equipment selection for defending themselves against manslaughter charges: “I carry nothing but deadly force tools”. I would recommend optimizing for winning the fight in a way that gets you the least involvement with the legal system.

I’d just run away. So would I, if I could. This stops being the perfect answer as soon as you are a better runner than your significant other or children. If they aren’t within arms reach it could very well turn into you needing to stand and fight while they get away.

I’d just shoot them. Ultimately I see a lot of people painting themselves into a corner where they are going to have to pull the trigger in order to have any self defense response. I hear a lot of talk in training circles about “lethal force options.” Lethal force is not optional, it’s mandatory. If I had a choice to make I would choose something other than shooting. Lethal force is what happens when all those options are taken away. If I am not facing a deadly force threat then shooting isn’t even an option.

Pepper Spray

Posted by Mostly Genius – July 21, 2009

Looking at the Private Citizen Equipment Poll I was really surprised to see how few of the respondents carry pepper spray. I am guessing that people don’t really understand what a valuable defensive tool it can be.

Low level of force. The real value of pepper spray is that you can apply it very early in a potentially dangerous situation. Because it is such a low level of force it can be used much sooner and with less discrimination than higher levels of force. If somebody was closing the distance with you in a dark parking lot as soon as you command them to stop and they don’t you can spray them. You would have a hard time justifying the use of your firearm, but spraying them would be entirely reasonable.

Stand-off capability. Even with good unarmed combative/martial arts skills you will still need to be fighting at contact distance. Pepper spray could stop the fight before anyone is grabbing or striking you.

Deterrent value. Pepper spray separates the casually interested assailants from the truly motivated ones. Many of those who would be willing to fist fight (and escalate from there) will quit when they get sprayed, as soon as they get sprayed. Those that want to continue after an application are at least continuing the fight with a handicap.

Effectiveness. A common complaint is that doesn’t work all the time, but in fact shooting people doesn’t work all the time either. Just as with firearms, pepper spray is more effective with good training and tactics. Most people make the mistake of threatening to use it, rather than simply spraying and using the element of surprise. Giving the assailant the opportunity to mentally prepare for getting sprayed reduces its effectiveness.

A backstop for other levels of force. Even if pepper spray didn’t produce a “one shot stop”, using it before applying a higher level of force (such as striking) will provide some legal protection. This is the same process that law enforcement uses (situation permitting), to try and gain compliance with the least amount of harm. If doesn’t provide the desired result you haven’t lost anything.

Broadly legal. In most places pepper spray doesn’t have anything like the number of restrictions that other weapons do. Where I live the only place I can’t carry pepper spray is a courthouse or similar ’secured’ area. According to state law here, a 14 year old can carry pepper spray with their parents permission.

Why not? I really can’t think of a reason not to carry pepper spray. From the poll results I see that some people are carrying multiple handguns, but no less lethal tools? You have a far greater chance of needing a low level force option than you do of needing a primary handgun, let alone a secondary. Pepper spray isn’t the tool for a deadly force confrontation, but a handgun isn’t any help until the situation reaches that point.

The Private Citizen Equipment Poll

Posted by Mostly Genius – July 17, 2009

This poll is focusing on the equipment that people carry in their role as private citizens. Clearly law enforcement or military will carry more (and different) equipment, so I am not really focusing on that. I am interested in seeing what the “everyday carry” is for most of our readers.

If you are going to choose “none of the above” then you probably shouldn’t select any of the above as well. If I am missing something from the list, please let me know in comments.

What is your 'private citizen' daily carry equipment?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...