What do you carry?

[Black Bear]

Mandirigma, I don't think you realize just how comfortable my duvet is.

On one level, I see your point. You are correct in saying that safety is never absolute. On the other, I am thinking that you might have misunderstood me. I see what I said that was susceptible to misinterpretation. I'm not saying that I think I'm invulnerable, or could never be a target of crime. I'm saying that every decision involves a tradeoff. I do not feel so unsafe or fearful that, like some sd'ers, I feel the need to go to great lengths to take my safety into my own hands.

If I want to perceive myself, my neighbourhood, etc. as being SAFE or UNSAFE, I can always come up with evidence one way or another. On the one hand, my city has the highest per capita number of high-risk federal parolees in the country (we're a small city and have a big max on the edge of town). On the other hand, our police service is one of the better ones in the country, and for that matter, in the world. On the one hand, I'm an upper-middle-class professional who doesn't drink or club, but on the other hand, my duplex (which is actually very nice) is in a low-rent neighbourhood with a checkered reputation. You get the idea. A person who wants to justify their decision to spend years in training in martial arts and to carry a lot of gear can find reasons to think and feel a certain way. And at the same time there are reasons on the other side. If I didn't want to be into MA/SD at all (as most folks do), and not carry anything emergency-related, I could rationalize this too. In the end, we do what we want.

Anyway, as I was saying, every choice involves a tradeoff. What does it cost me to wear OC, or a collapsible baton? Well, I have to acquire it. A good one, say from Fox Labs, isn't going to cost a fortune. Monadnock is a good baton, and I know where to get one for a good price. My friend/training partner works at a gun store, he'll cut me a deal. There are other costs. Awkwardness. I generally wear functional stuff like MEC and Royal Robbins when I can, but sometimes suits. If I'm going to carry these things in a functional way where I can deploy them at a second's notice, it'll probably be on my beltline or something (hip pocket clips are dedicated to my cell and tac folder). Heck, I wear Dri-skin climbing tights with an elastic waistband sometimes, and I really scratch my head to figure out where to put my tiny Pelican! Kelly McCann talks about wearing the baton in a "groinline carry" (tucked anterior to the hip joint). But I don't feel like having that thing stick into my nuts 12 hours a day, and I don't think the store will like me trying it out for comfort, so I never bothered. There's the quasi-legal issues because of the laws of my jurisdiction. We're not supposed to carry weapons on our person, and anyone who wears OC has to say it's for "dogs". I can talk my way out with a cop, but it's just another annoyance, another consideration.

What else does it cost me? I'm a swingin' single dude, and a psychologist. My whole approach to the world depends on the fact that I put people at ease very quickly when I meet them. I can't look all ninja-geared up the way, say, an electrician can. So that's another reason I choose not to have an arsenal on me.

Now if I believed that at any time, I could get assaulted, mugged, raped, etc. do you think that fear would override these other considerations and "inconveniences"? You bet it would. If I continued to feel that way for a period of time, I'm pretty sure I would carry more stuff, maybe even pack heat illegally. But the thing is, that fear isn't there. I get up in the morning, drive to work, work, drive out to run a couple errands, drive home, maybe go out to a coffee shop on the west end with friends, maybe train, go home. I have no enemies. The following crimes are ALMOST unheard of in my town: home invasions (unless the vic is involved with gang activity), carjackings, robberies of open businesses with lots of customers, etc. In fact, there was a series of three home invasions a year or two ago, in a small nearby town--it was in our papers for a week. In our city there are about twenty murders a year. You read through the descriptions of each, and it's mostly related to a certain lifestyle (drugs mainly) or within the family.

I have taken a middle path. I do carry stuff, but only what's light, convenient, and multipurpose. The knife is not only a tool but a reminder to myself of my values of preparedness, initiative, and taking charge of my own life. Not against feared strangers, but toward "eventualities", be they a nice, ripe piece of fruit, the tricky-to-manage behaviour of a violent nutjob, or a particularly tough piece of packing tape.

I can see how some people will decide the other way. Protecting yourself against crime on the one hand involves 1) consideration of a very infrequent event, and on the other hand, 2) extremely high stakes (being severely assaulted, and failing to manage it well, is VERY costly). It's tough to argue that one choice is all that much more rational than another--that's why we call it personal choice. We can't "argue" our decision. We can only explain it. My instructor carries a fixed blade and a monadnock anytime he's not on the mat. I DON'T think he's nuts. I don't think YOU'RE nuts. But it doesn't make sense TO ME. I'd rather have the duvet. When I'm assaulted, I'll deal with the situation as it is, in that moment.

 

[Black Bear]

someguy, I think he's just saying that there is no such thing as ABSOLUTE safety, in the sense that no one is immune to violence. It's a matter of degree and folks shouldn't assume that it could never happen to them. That's all.

 

[RHD]

Big dogs are cool, but I imagine you don't take it to the movies, to work, to night classes... Everyday carry here.

You're right, he doesn't go everywhere with me. But he often rides with me to places like the grocery store, mudane errands, etc, especially if those things have to be done at night.
I don't carry much ever in the way of practical weaponry. Mostly, I just carry myself in a confident manner using body language to say "not a good target". I live in an area that borders on some higher crime parts of town, but never have problems...at least none in the two years we've been living here. I believe in the defensive effects of awareness and presence.
Mike

 

[mandirigma]

Unfortunately, Black Bear, this is where our paths part and we disagree vehemently: I have no compunction whatsoever about putting all manner of weaponry down my pants in public.

...When I'm assaulted, I'll deal with the situation as it is, in that moment.

I think everything you mentioned is well put with regard to deciding what items to carry.

As you indicate above, we'll "deal" with it. I believe this is important, because this speaks to owning our own choices. In turn, this is important because when we own our choices and believe them to be reasonable, then we just might be on the brink of happiness. And being happy is key. Why spend time learning any of this SD crap just to defend an unhappy existence?

A couple of things:

a) I too am constrained by my professional circumstances in the way I must dress. As such, I am interested in things I can carry and still "stay under the radar." This stealth existence is crucial. We must be non-threatening. We have lives to lead. Our ninjabilities must be a secret!

b) I believe we're on identical pages with regard to the "safety" semantics. I have a tendency to complicate matters with seemingly unexplained platitudes. (When it comes right down to it, my life is almost intolerably "safe," too.) SD logic and clear mental discipline should foster certain attitudes, IMHO. (Nearly) everyone always thinks they are 'safe' before they get attacked. Clearly, we must leave our feelings and intuitions out of the picture when objectively discussing such matters. Similarly, as a psychologist you must define only observable behaviors when charting on patients, right?

c) My personal life philosophy is also centered around "working it out," "talking people down," etc. I have a wishy-washy, altruistic river of benevolence that simply gushes forth. I try to leave my counseling skills at the behavioral hospital, however, when I leave work. This was not always easy to do! In recent years I have been aided by some thoughts:

1) "Think of the cruelty beyond our comprehension ... There is no compromise possible with such people, no meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror. Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it."
-Tony Blair, 2 Oct., 2001

2) "Mercy...where it was backed with the power to save or kill." -Nitobe

These examples helped define the relationship between my world of helping, saving and giving that I admire and the world where only my violent martial skill solves problems. If anything, my studies of benevolence should aid me in understanding when to abandon it for violent action.



d) In the end (or I should say, "my current thinking is..."), what gets carried with me is a matter of preparation not paranoia. When I consider new SD thoughts/gadgets, etc., they must pass the "seatbelt test." Like a seatbelt, they must be easy to use, remember, implement, such that they in no way detract from my overall goal: To lead a fun, rewarding life. Also like a seatbelt, they must be capable of benefitting me should their services be called upon.

There are no perfect solutions, only reasonable compromises.


Just my 16 cents.

Cool thread.

:asian:

 

[Black Bear]

Mandirigma, cool thread indeed. I think our thinking is very close, but the way that we work it out in practice is slightly different.

So you're a head shrinker too? To clarify, I'm an educational psychologist, so we don't deal with "patients" per se. Er, "clients" we call them.

Seatbelt test is good. Good analogy. I agree that collapsible baton, OC, and tac folder are reasonable things for folks to carry if they can make it work for their lifestyles. In fact, I somewhat understand the thinking of Americans, who like to carry guns. Not agree, but kind of understand. Americans on the whole value self-reliance and independence to a slightly greater degree.

Perhaps I have less faith than you in ability of "clear self-defense logic" to bring us to solid conclusions on how to govern ourselves in an issue such as "what to carry", particularly to the exclusion of feelings, etc. You sound like someone with a psych background, so think back to social cognition and the way in which people selectively process information on the basis of beliefs or feelings they hold a priori.

Mainly I think it's because of something I mentioned earlier--that it is based on the forecasting of serious assaults: events which are 1) EXTREMELY RARE and 2) EXTREMELY HIGH STAKES. On the one hand a person could reasonably think "given the high stakes, and what it would cost me to lose a streetfight, I'm not going to miss ANYTHING I can do to give myself the best possible odds. I will spare no expense because what is at stake is too great." And he'll take along everything possible. And his reasoning makes perfect sense. On the other, someone could say, "The chances of anything at all happening on any given day are so preposterously low, since I lead a safe lifestyle, am always around good people, and have good awareness and defusion skills, why should I inconvenience myself with a folder, what are the odds that the folder will even make a big difference in the outcome, since it could be such a quick blitz it'll be over before I realize it happened, etc." And there is just as much logic in his thinking. And yet when these people look at one another, one will characterize the other as blissfully ignorant, naive, pollyannaish. The other will think to himself, "this guy must have low serotonin because he tends to think catastrophically". And really, all it is is that it's not possible to "logically" say that one is more correct than the other.

Too late to be thinking of being assaulted. Back to my duvet. Unlike my folder and Pelican, I use it as intended EVERY DAY.

 

[someguy]

Hmm a peacefull debate good.*gives every body a coockie for being polite*
"Mercy...where it was backed with the power to save or kill." -Nitobe
I like that quote.
Yes random and somewhat off topic but oh well.

 

[Cryozombie]

Yes random and somewhat off topic but oh well.

Ok. Ahem.

I carry:

My Keys, on a metal Kubotan.
A CRKT M-16-14M folder
My Wallet with my Id
My Cellphone.

If I have my coat, I also keep essentials like Gum, Painkillers, a pen and scrap paper in my pockets.

I have a First Aid Kit, spare eyeglasses, a roadside emergency kit, and a AOL Survival Tin (as seen in the Martialist) in my car.

I have a SMALL First Aid Kit, a SMALL toolkit and an AOL Survival Tin in the "toolbox" on my motorcycle.

 

[Thanatos]

I carry at any given time:
My wallet, which is usually on a foot long chain.
A zippo
My Cell Phone
Keys
And a Kershaw assisted opener. Blades about 4 inches long.

 

[Black Bear]

Those springy Kershaws are neat, but they weird me out.

 

[Thanatos]

Yeah, a friend of mine doesn't like them much, but its a good blade, and I got it from a friend who worked in a knife shop, so it was like 40 percent off with his store discount. It has served me well for the two years I have had it.

 

[Black Bear]

Well yes, a friend of mine owns one--a very small one--and I have to say it's a good knife.

 

[mandirigma]

Since I couldn't find the "why" of carrying thread:
I should add 'convenient' as a requirement within the seatbelt analogy. If it's not convenient, then it clearly interferes with my ability to lead a happy life. If I spent 22.45 minutes each day futzing with soft body armor, while logical from a SD standpoint, it clearly robs me of 22.45 min. I could spend chasing my wife around the house. To me that's a no-brainer (she's hot).

Let's consider ALL safety/risk scenarios. Without diving into clear numbers on the statistical risk of attacks, it's important to consider SD from the perspective of overall safety. We should not consider SD unlikely, particularly if compared against other pitfalls we might encounter. If I include SD within my 'safety' mindset, being prepared is much more pragmatic than paranoia. For example, there are places where one is much more likely to be attacked in their car than at home. Obviously it makes sense to find some "seatbelt tested items" and prepare somewhat for car travel. That does not mean we stop locking our doors at home, however! From this perspective, think about all the safety items we indulge that are low (or much lower) risk compared to being attacked. People (myself included) have all manner of insurances against events that are potentially less likely than being attacked (e.g.- flood, fire, car/auto, life insurance, prenuptial agreement).
Of course the level of risk for all these eventualities is unknowable. Nearly all of these are unlikely, including SD. I have spent lots of time being confused about this very issue (what to carry) over the years! I put some stock in the silly little "seatbelt analogy" because without it I'd be walking the streets with a howitzer, 42 pitbulls and contingent of impersonal suits all named "Bubba." That, to me, is why it is critical to take pains to ensure my preparations for unlikely events do not detract from my overall goal: chasing the wife on full throttle.

Trying to hone in on this dynamic process while accounting for all the variables is what makes this topic so confusing, and so fun!

The "what" of CARRYING:
Whatever is convenient and effective. This narrows us down pretty fast to pistols, OC, blades, batons. Not much else describes our parameters. Personally, I'm holding out for a lightsaber.

As it happens, what we do NOT carry becomes more clearly defined. A non-carry tool does not have to be convenient to carry, but must retain (hopefully increase) its efficacy. Then we get into longarms for SD. (I.e.- pistols are really not effective, but they are convenient. Longarms are more effective, but not convenient.)

Finally...

...The knife is not only a tool but a reminder to myself of my values of preparedness, initiative, and taking charge of my own life...

Very, very excellent point! From that perspective (from which I wholeheartedly believe I derive significant benefits), you can see how we DO use the crap we lug around ON A DAILY BASIS! Much like a duvet, really...

:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

I'm really glad to see that I'm not the only one that carries a knife. I didn't used to carry one except a leatherman until someone gave me one at Christmas.

Realistically, for me, using a slicing motion rather than a stabbing motion, a knife is about as practical as I can get. Although I do have an Escrima stick under my Silverados rear seat (out of reach and out of site).

I think the biggest issue (for me) is the legality of what we carry. If its not legal, then its not worth it. So my stick is legal ( I hope) and my knife is small. Hopefully, I don't need them. :asian:

 

[Black Bear]

Stabbers and slashers all have their arguments. When it comes down to it the stabbers convinced me that in its own way, stabbing will do more damage, bleed more, etc. but I was trained as a slasher and you'll generally hit the superficial blood vessels and muscles what you're going for. And slashing usually evokes a withdrawing reflex, so that I have forward momentum against the guy.

Stabbers' reasoning is that stabbing is like slashing a guy INSIDE.

 

[OULobo]

I believe from a medical standpoint, stabbing is much worse. The possibilities of infection, inaccessability, compressed wounds, major organ trauma and internal bleeding are aspects that aren't easily treated, but an open outside cut is fairly easily treated. The worst parts of a slash are the phychological effects and the chance of severing arteries/veins and tendons. I guess eitherway it's nasty, but I'd take a slash (anywhere but the neck) over a stabb anyday.

 

[Black Bear]

But just because it's worse for you, it doesn't follow that that's the technique of choice to stop an attack.

 

[James Kovacich]

My reasoning for slashing instead of stabbing is stabbing is to lethal. All that is needed is subdueing or escaping, NOT KILLING.

I never have, nor do I plan to ever use lethal force. Its against everything I stand for. If I need lethal force, I might as well get a gun permit and carry a gun.
:asian:

 

[mandirigma]

...nor do I plan to ever use lethal force. Its against everything I stand for. ...

Just a thought:
I don't believe we are talking about killing (I hope). We are talking about stopping an attack. Unless we're phenomenally skilled, we can't choose whether or not to use lethal force. Sometimes, often even, homicide (which we will prove justifiable) is the unfortunate result of trying to subdue or escape an attack.

Saying lethal force runs against what we stand for, IMHO, is not germane to most martial discussion. Ultimately, it matters little how we feel or what we believe. Regrettably, if we are justified in acting at all, lethal force will probably be the only tool capable of aiding our survival. Saying we don't believe in lethal force is analogous to saying we don't believe in earthquakes. Lethal force is what it is. If we don't "believe" in lethal force and its utility, then we shouldn't say we believe in trying to survive in the first place.

A very ugly reality for sure, but we can't have our cake and eat it too. The bad guy may die. But he should have considered that before he tried to take me from my life/family.

Be safe.
:asian:

 

[rompida]

Hmmm......... using lethal force against lethal force. Seems like a no brainer to me.
I had the opportunity to train with a lesser known, but great FMA, who taught us some "ice picking" drills. As a side note, he added, "they are not there to be your friend". Do you think the bad guy will be worried about hurting you too much?

Personally I carry a very limited arsenal due to my profession, which is teaching. In my car, I carry a 14" Mag lite, which makes quite a good baton/stick. In my coat, I have an arsenal of ninja #2 throwing pencils! :uhyeah:

 

[7starmantis]

I never have, nor do I plan to ever use lethal force. Its against everything I stand for. If I need lethal force, I might as well get a gun permit and carry a gun.
:asian:

I completely understand your point, but I think lethal force is not simply the force used to kill. Lethal force may not kill the subject, but is simply the force used. What I mean is that if being attacked you simply react and use whatever means neccessary for you to survive, you just used lethal force. The attacker dying is not the point, what you did was chose to protect yourself regardless of its outcome, that, I belive, is what lethal force in actuality is. If your attacked and you pull punches or kicks, decide not to use the 8 inch pole lying at your feet, or the knife on the table because you are afriad of killing the attacker, that is not using lethal force, and in my humble and mostly unpopular opinion, completely imbecilic and most irresponsible.

7sm