Marine brings a knife and his warface to a gunfight

BlackFive brought this story to my attention the other day. I finished most of the post that day, but then wasn't sure about continuing it to completion, as it kind of strayed off on a tangent....I seem to have a habit of rambling and losing focus of the topic, these days.

Former Marine kills would-be robber
3 men, one woman attack waiter walking in Midtown

By BILL MONTGOMERY
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 05/30/06

A pack of would-be robbers including, a pregnant 17-year-old, figured a Midtown waiter walking to his girlfriend's house Monday night would be an easy mark, according to police.

But, in Thomas Autry, 36, the bandits picked the wrong victim, said Atlanta police homicide Detective Danny Stephens. The former Marine, cornered by his pursuers on Penn Avenue at 4th Street, fought back with a pocket knife in a deadly melee that left the young woman dead and a man in his late teens seriously injured at a hospital.

As banter in atlanter puts it, "if you pull your shotgun on a Marine and he shows you his war face you should probably pack it up and call it a night."

Autry had left his job at the Jocks & Jills restaurant in Midtown and was walking along Penn Avenue when a blue Cadillac pulled alongside and three men, one armed with a shotgun, and the woman jumped from the car.

"This group had robbed two men on Piedmont earlier Monday night, taking a video camera and a cellphone," Stephens said.

"Autry takes off running, and they chase him. During the chase, Autry's trying to get into his backpack to get a pocket knife, which slows him down," Stephens said.

During the chase, Autry repeatedly yelled "fire, fire," which Stephens said attracted nearby residents' attention.

Grabbing the knife from his backpack, Autry managed to kick the shotgun from the man's hands and stabbed the woman in the chest, fatally wounding her. Stephens said. In the melee, Autry also stabbed one of the male suspects. Another suspect attempted to shoot Autry with a .380 pistol, which misfired, Stephens said.

The suspects ran back to the Cadillac and drove to Atlanta Medical Center, where police arrested them. The young woman, "about two weeks pregnant," was pronounced dead at the hospital, Stephens said.

Some people might be of the opinion that you shouldn't do anything risky that endangers yourself further by provoking or aggravating the aggressor. Not all circumstances are the same, but in general, I'm of the mindset along the lines of Jeff Cooper, the father of modern combat hand gunning:

“If violent crime is to be curbed it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore, what he must be taught to fear is the victim."

Banter also makes this statement, " this incident shatter's the long-time rule of thumb that one should not take a knife to a gun fight."

It's a separate point from the news piece, but I'd like to take the time to address it.

There is an excellent training video that many police departments used to use, called "Surviving Edged Weapons". It features one of my longtime teachers, Dan Inosanto, demonstrating the Tueller 21 feet rule. It basically states the following:

in the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.

There seems to be some controversy in the interpretation of that, but for me it's always seemed fairly simple, and straightforward (I'd be curious to hear Curt weigh in on this, since he's the police officer). Edged weapons, in close-quarters, can do massive, massive damage. If not superior, it is at least equal to the potential damage of a firearm. A firearm is nothing more than a "bullet-shooter", that if not aimed at you, with the possible exception of some powder burns and muzzle flash, isn't going to harm you. It's whole advantage is in distance.

The average person can close the gap between himself and another person in about a second and a half. (This video demonstrates the Tueller Rule. Unfortunately, it is rather static and nondynamic in presenting the hypothetical scenario, where the officer's reaction is limited to just draw and aim; in reality, there are many variables that can come into play, but the point of the video is to isolate and illuminate the ability of a surprise charge, and how quickly an aggressor can close the gap).

The point I'm wanting to make here, is that we should never try to armchair Monday morning quarterback what officers should or should not have done in a bad situation, without fully understanding the full dynamics of a police shooting incident, in that particular moment. I sometimes hear people ponder, "Well why didn't that officer just shoot him in the leg or just wound him somewhere else?" Officers are trained to shoot center mass for a very good reason: it's the best guarantee to hit a moving target while under stress, and the quickest way to stop an attacker; it's just unfortunate that the vital organs happen to be located in that area. The officer's intent isn't to kill, but to successfully stop. When anyone is caught off-guard and unawares, in the second and a half seconds that it may take an assailant to clear the distance, in that time, the defender's brain has the delayed reaction of registering and perceiving the threat, reaching for his sidearm and drawing it out of the holster, bringing it to bear and taking aim...all of that can be a split-second too late against a surprise charge.

Anyone who has ever been in any kind of physical confrontation knows that training in the absence of subjecting yourself to the same kind of psychological stress and adrenalin rush you normally would experience when "the s**t hits the fan", does not adequately prepare you for the real deal, when it happens. It's related to the difference between practice at the shooting range, where you can take careful aim at stationary paper targets; and shooting at a combative range, where you are subject to different stimuli and stresses that engages a sense of danger and places you in various circumstances to put into practice, various techniques and tactics in a less-than-controlled, static environment; creating psychological realism is a huge factor in adequate preparations for combat. In boxing, you can hit all the focus mitts you want, beat up on the heavy bag and learn pre-rehearsed techniques...but unless you apply those techniques and hitting power in sparring with a living, breathing, uncooperative opponent, you will not be adequately prepared for the real boxing match. There are a variety of ways to spar, but generally speaking, it is controlled chaos, that should simulate as closely as possible, the real deal, and still allow your fighter to survive the practice. So that he will have fought a thousand battles to prepare him for the one that actually matters.