If you read my blog, you know my stance on firearms, armed self-defense, and so on. There are some people out there though, who don’t think the same way that I do. They think that if you are put in a life or death situation that you can reason your way out of it. Simply comply with your assailant, and they will leave you unharmed. If you are assaulted, you should simply surrender your wallet, your phone, your car, etc. What if they demand you surrender a loved one? Yep, just comply, and you will survive, according to these idiots. If you are a woman, and they attempt to rape you, are you supposed to just “lie back and think of England?”
Above is an example of this idiotic “rationalization.” As victims of rape know all too well, while the physical act may only last minutes, the emotional and psychological damage lasts a lifetime.
Rapists are not the only ones out there who would victimize ordinary citizens. You could be killed by someone over the contents of your wallet, even if you do comply. There is also is no way to tell, whether the assailant would have left his victim alone if they complied or not. But, if they are irrational enough to think that they deserve to take what belongs to someone else, why would anyone apply any other rational thought to them? I’ve seen that faulty logic of “compliance” explained this way;
Self-Defense Strategy #1: Compliance
Compliance involves cooperating with the predatory intent of your assailant. Whether you decide to comply or not, depends on what is at risk and your level of “perceived vulnerability” in the encounter.
Just for the record, if you follow this advice, you are now a victim. Compliance is not a self-defense strategy. Quite simply, it means that you surrender before you even try to defend yourself or a loved one. Of course, the rationalization is that an attacker just wants your stuff, and doesn’t actually want to hurt you. Are you sure? Are you absolutely positive that they have no intent to cause you any physical harm whatsoever if you comply?
The article at the link only goes to prove that irrational people will do irrational things, and you cannot reason with them to be rational. Perhaps the reason that anti-gun zealots think that you can rationalize with those that would harm you is because they are themselves not rational? It’s food for thought.