Gabe Suarez articles on low-light conditions

[Qaz98]

I guess I just don’t see many scenarios in your home where a WML is needed, but IF you are going to shoot someone, I’d think common sense would say you’d want to know who that is.

The one advantage I see, is if your other hand is occupied holding your kids hand or carrying your kid. Then again, I guess it's debatable if you should expose yourself and your family member at the same time - like that Einstein in the recent Active Self Protection video, where the Brazilian cop ENGAGES a bad guy with a baby in his other arm! WTF. If your life is threatened, sure, do what you go to do. But to engage in a robbery? GTF out of there.

I've stopped reading his blog for learning, and more as a counterpoint, I suppose. He definitely carries more of a sheepdog persona, which I don't think is really what the armed citizen should be. I love Greg Ellfritz, Mas Ayoob, Tom Givens, ACLDN - their newsletters/blogs/columns. I'm just a sponge, but want to absorb the right information - Suarez seems a bit off. Or I should say, his advice is not for me.

[GJM]

Mission accomplished for Suarez — so much more buzz than if he said to follow rule 4, which is “be sure of your target and what is behind it.”

[Casual Friday]

Mission accomplished for Suarez — so much more buzz than if he said to follow rule 4, which is “be sure of your target and what is behind it.”

Attachment 21948

[El Cid]

Mission accomplished for Suarez — so much more buzz than if he said to follow rule 4, which is “be sure of your target and what is behind it.”

Yea, the old "there is no such thing as bad press" routine. Except he has lit a bonfire to his reputation and credentials. Not that I paid him any mind previously, but now I'll immediately disregard everything he says.

[JodyH]

Except he has lit a bonfire to his reputation and credentials.

Welcome to 2006.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

There is “liability conscious” & “crippled by fear of liability” - don’t purposely confuse the two.

One takes great pains to not be the focus of paperwork without any other options but doesn’t sacrifice safety, advantage or tactics to do so.
The other will put himself in danger to avoid being the perceived bad guy...

[TDA]

Now I've spent an inordinate amount of time reading Suarez International blog posts. It's worth studying how he starts with relatively tame premises like "a WML has less general utility than a flashlight" and "often you'll be able to identify a threat without a flashlight" and then as a reader you're holding his beer and it's on.

[Wendell]

Suarez' mindset reminds me of a line from a Heinlein novel:

WARNING!!!
Ring Bell, Wait, Advance with your Hands
Up. Stay on path, avoid mines...

[HCM]

Hunter shoots pickup truck after mistaking it for a deer, police say

http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoor...olice-say.html

So we have hunters firing shots at occupied vehicles because they can't tell the difference between a brown pick up truck and a deer in broad daylight but Suarez claims you don't need a light to positively ID possible intruders in your home in the dark ?

[TDA]

It reminds me of what one of my law school buddies called “The one, two, six rule.” This was an attempt to describe your options for having drinks with friends after class. His observation was that the possible stopping points were after one, after two, or after devolving into a shitshow.
The format is identical. 1) sometimes you don’t need a light to see and identify the bad guy. 2) sometimes the bad guy is identifying themselves as a bad guy, e.g. by shooting at you. 3) sometimes there is no good explanation what that sound was, and you’re really scared, and since your spouse is in bed and you know it’s not Mick Jagger since he’s home with Melanie and the new baby, that’s the process of elimination.
It’s not the process of elimination though. Feelings of certainty are feelings, and knowing your target and what is beyond it should not be feelings, we really want that to be knowledge.