The Origins Of Christian Pacifism by Gabe Suarez

[HK4U]

Boris e-mailed this to me today. This is a pretty good read.

The Origins Of Christian Pacifism by Gabe Suarez | Church security site for church safety, church video surveillance, church security training, church safety information and the latest church security news.

[HK4U]

Allow me to add the following also.

A Place for Truth Essays

[chroode]

I forwarded to my church's chief of security.

[1911 Headbanger]

I have always appreciated Gabe Suarez and his blogs. Never attended one of his classes, but if he teaches, like he writes in his emails, and articles, I'd like to do a little learning under him.

[Sheldon]

Gabe is a good guy, father and top notch instructor, been to several of his classes and all I can say is it was worth every penny and then some....

[Gabe Suarez]

Many thanks. Looking down and pointing up gents.

[GeneralSumter]

I too am a born-again Christian and believe it is our duty, moreso than our right, to defend ourselves, our family, and those who cannot defend themselves. I appreciate the article, Mr. Suarez, and HK4U for pointing it out to us. I do question the use of Luke 22:36 as instruction from Jesus to arm ourselves, however. But that is a discussion for another day.

[FN1910]

They are both good articles but at time I felt that Gabe Suarez was grasping to justify his theories. I am not saying that they are wrong but there is not great strngth in his justifications. The article by Rev. Hammond is extremely good as does not try to justify his feelings as being absolute but rather based on his and others interpretations. I prefer the King James version of the Bible as I have to study and research the meanings of the scriptures to understand them. With some of the newer versions it is too easy to accept the translators version as fact rather than determining it yourself. It is too easy to take a single verse as having meaning without putting it in context of what it is about.

I think Rev. Hammond's article points out that we are not to sit idly by but to be active in defense of ourselves and others. No matter how weird it sounds I am not in favor of capital punishment but I do support the execution of certain people. You ask how can that be but I do not believe that killing someone for punishment is justified. However sometimes a killer or other prisoner may continue to inflcict harm on a family even from inside the jail. They may even be able to continue to arrange murders or other crimes. How many times have you heard about some prisoner continuing to cause problems for a family with their outside contacts, or through the court system with trivial lawsuits or similar. Until these people can be separated from society in a manner such as superman's phantom zone our only alternative is execution.

To give an example I had friend that was convicted of arranging the murder of my cousin and in jail. While in jail he arranged for his brother to have one of the withnesses in the trial killed and his brother is serving time for that right now. I knew another fellow that was serving a life sentence for killing a friend of mine and while in jail killed another person. I am not in favor of killing them for revenge but to separate them from society.

I think Rve. Hammond's article says that God expects us to protect ourselves but not be the agressor. With that thought think of how many wars have been fought over religion or at least was a major factor. In truth almost all of them.

[Sheldon]

in todays email

SOME NOTES FROM FORCE ON FORCE


1). All fights involve one party taking the initiative and the other party responding. There are no mutually agreed upon fights. You start the ambush, react to it, or avoid the danger area altogether. Most so-called modern gun training, takes the assumption that, due to a super developed mind-set, that the "modern operator" will never be surprised and thus always have the initiative. Very wishful thinking if you ask me.


2). If you have good information and can trust what you see, you can take the initiative on the adversary. This may mean preemptive drawing and shooting, as well as preemptively leaving before the fight begins. Distance benefits those who wish to be preemptive which is why the insistence of certain schools in always maintaining such distance, and always being alert.


Problem is, you can't "always" do anything. If you can guarantee always being alert, 24/7/365, and will never be surprised - and can guarantee it 100%, then just work on your marksmanship and don't worry about anything else. In fact, why are you even listening to me? The rest of us will look at other solutions.


3). If the adversary also has the initiative the result will either be a "suicide drill" where each man kills the other, or a stand-off where nothing happens until one of them decides to either act or leave. We see the suicide drill a lot when training first time FOF students from certain gun disciplines. They rely on a fast draw without thinking that the other man may also have a fast draw, or even get to start the fight.


4). Even in cases of unequal speed, but equal initiative, when men rely only on draw speed, unless one screws up the draw, the situation we described ends up with both men shot. The hits may be separated by 1/4 or 1/2 second, but excluding a head shot, I do not believe a pistol shot will be likely to stop the other man from pressing a trigger.


5). All gunfights are 50% shooting and 50% not being shot. I think most sane men would agree that the "not getting shot" is more important that the shooting part. Moving sharply off the line of attack drastically increases your safety from the adversary's gunfire. Staying put in a perfect Weaver or Isosceles, increases the odds of taking a hit unless you are ambushing the other man with total surprise or are behind cover (again preemptive).


Why do you think most schools avoid any force on force at all, and those who do use it reserve it for "hunt the burglar" type scenarios that will support their particular "system"?


6). Some directions of movement tend to increase the angle away from the gun man's muzzle better than others. This means it takes more time for him to get his muzzle back on you. It also means it gives you more time on the trigger. With sufficient hits, he may not ever be able to catch you. I say "may" because there are no guarantees in a fight.


7). In a reactive event (which most CCW fights will tend to be) it is imperative to move off the "X" to avoid being hit. As well, drawing and getting your own shots moving toward him is highly important. If either one is delayed you increase the chances of getting shot.


Most guys get shot when they stop. They initiate movement and avoid the first few shots, (the classic gun school side step) but then stop to take a precise shot. At that point they get hit. Keep moving until he's down, you have escaped, or you are behind cover. Movement is life; stationary shooting in the open is death.


9). The most important step once the game opens is to step off the X. Make that dynamic!


10). As hard for some people as it is to hear this, in a reactive gunfight, your physical conditioning is a factor in your survivability. Agility is an issue. If you lack agility, you'd best be hard on the alertness phase so you do not have to be reactive. The problem is that it is hard to guarantee such things. Historically there is a belief that the gun trumps everything, and that there is no need to do anything else. Your first force on force evolution changes that. Instead of trying to shave a tenth of a second off your draw, or shooting a tighter group, get to the gym!


11). Centerline Draws - Appendix Draw, or Cross Draw are markedly faster than strong side hip or behind the back. The lines and amount of motion required to get the gun on target are dramatically less. Why these two modes of carry have been ignored by many is primarily due to artificial restrictions at competitions and competition-based shooting schools.


12). No one has seen a traditional sight picture for the first three shots in our Reactive Drills since I began teaching this material. Each FOF student must understand less than optimum methods of aligning the pistol. Point Shooting, Meat-N-Metal and other methods have value and their place in the fighting progression.


13). An understanding of the ranges of combat and what is applicable at each distance interval is important. When people are pressed, they change the interval by either running away, or closing the gap to a clinch. The idea that you will always be able to keep your distance "no matter what" is ridiculous. Learn how to fight up close when the time arrives. Your ability to understand this and exploit it will make you a better fighter.


14). Concessions of accuracy and movement. When moving do not concede your speed of movement to gain an edge in accuracy. Rather than modifying your movement to accommodate range-based shooting, modify your range-based shooting to accommodate your movement.