Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Western WA
    Posts
    5,370
    I hate this word but I will use it anyway...Meh.

    This article repackages Grossman’s material (and some of his poorer material at that). Hey, that’s ok, we all write some things that have been written before. But...meh.

    Yes, that most people have an aversion to killing is true. And when the studies were done about soldiers not shooting the enemy, yes that is useful info. Old info but lots of people aren’t familiar with it so fair enough.

    But definitionally...there are people willing to kill. Lots of em. And I don’t think they all needed to be conditioned into it.

    More later.
    Brent Yamamoto
    Suarez International Tier 1 Staff Instructor

    Ready, willing, able. Bring it.

    Instagram: karate_at_1200fps

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,342
    Funny...I have tipped over a few bad guys. Never saw them as "my kind". Saw them as targets. Never had any issues. Maybe I am one of those "psychopaths" our friend writes about...or maybe my self image is not like his...or like most modern domesticated males.
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    647
    Or maybe it just needed to be done and you did it. Problem encountered, problem fixed.
    Discipline is just choosing between what you want now and what you want most.


    Gunsite Orange, API -250 Sept. 1978 (Everybody starts somewhere)
    CRG - July 2011, Oct. 2017
    PSP - April 2012
    TMCO - Sept. 2012
    TWOTU since 2011

    Glock Certified Armorer


  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,342
    Yeah...there may be an element of that, but that was not the underlying "WHY".
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    5,398
    The article is crap, of course. Bad research, hasty generalizations, outright falsehoods. They've been pretty well listed above.

    Interestingly, I notice that the snackbars and bangers of the world seem to have no hesitation at putting a mag dump into a rival or an unlucky bystander. So that kinda tubes the "universal" theory.

    If this were a freshman paper, I'd give it a "C", at best.
    __________

    "To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,118
    I agree with Brent, meh. I’ve never read grossman’s books, but I’ve just recently read somewhere although he had a ranger tab, he never did much for missions. I’ll have to look it up to be sure. The guy is a psychologist. I’ve learned more about killing right here on this forum. I think there’s lots of people willing to kill. I think it’s all in their upbringing. Kids that grow up in a utopian, egalitarian childhood that the biggest fight they have is which video game theyre going to play next, basically grow up to be pussies. I grew up in a tough neighborhood. When you hear and feel others bones break, see the reaction of booting someone in the face to make sure they stay down, because that was a reality of growing up where I did, it gets easier every time you have to do it. Killing is just a natural progression. Of course I could be full of shit because I’ve never killed anyone, but I know deep down, there will be no hesitation. I think those of us who have had exposure to some kind of violence, real violence, with no rules, have the edge in these situations.
    Last edited by WOLF220; 02-15-2019 at 07:16 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    44,342
    OK...my opinion. Killing is natural. Watch a little kid step on a bug, or kill a bird with a rock. He doesn't feel remorse about it. Then the child is raised by a homo-pacificus set of parents, sent to a rainbows-and-butterflies church, and they are taught (incorrectly but nonetheless) that killing is wrong and violence solves nothing.

    The result is hesitant good guys that get killed by bad guys - or good guys who somehow got past their "pacificus training" and manage to kill the bad guy, but then their entire upbringing comes up and dick punches them into depression and the new buzz-word "PTSD". As if that was a normal and expected matter.

    I saw and was directly involved in plenty of death, albeit not as much as some here. I have never had any issues from it. I recently spoke to a NSW type guy about this. He said in the Teams, he doesn't know of anyone that claims PTSD. He said the guys that have issues are the rear eschelon dudes and gals that handle non-combat duties, and one day they find themselves in it and then have issues. I don't know...I just know about me, and the guys I worked with.

    When we killed a killer-thug it was celebrated. There really were "K" parties. And I don't recall too many of the sort I chose to work with that had any reluctance to engage. Nevertheless, the phenomena exists. A definite hesitation to kill. I think that is not the natural state and that it is a learned behavior.

    Just saying
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    842
    Like Papa said there have been accusations that
    S.L.A. Marshall played free and lose with data. Being an old guy I heard one such allegation from someone in a position to know.

    Heard a story that when Marshall was a young soldier in WWI, he was in a building and got confronted by a German. Marshall tried to shoot him with a M1911 and it jammed and one of his squad mates, a Texan, shot the German with a revolver, presumably a M1917, saving Marshall’s life. The guy telling the story said Marshall never liked M1911s after that. Don’t know if it is true but that was the story.

    The WWII lack of fire, if true, may have not been the result of a moral hesitancy to kill, so much as the training riflemen got. Most U.S. infantry in WWII were poorly trained by modern standards. IIRC they were also only trained to shoot at visible targets and often I understand in infantry combat especially at range in areas with trees and bushes, it is hard to pick out individual targets. By Vietnam, you had a 30 rd rifle in the M16 and training to use “suppressive fire”.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,922
    Restating the obvious:

    If you deselect the warriors through MMPI, poly and psych interviews you get people who either can't handle the critical event or are true sociopaths.

    I suspect many here, including me, would never have been hired under current standards and philosophy.

    I can't address the .mil special ops take on this.
    Warrior for the working day.

    Es una cosa muy seria. --Robert Capa

    "...I ride the range in a Ford V8...Yippy Yi Yo Ki Yay." --Johnny Mercer

    "Can I move?...I'm better when I move."

    1, 4, 11. And a wakeup.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    In a positive state of mind
    Posts
    3,623
    One very important thing that needs to be considered is that, post SLA Marshall/pre-Vietnam, the Army changed its targets from bulls-eye targets to silhouettes, and its marksmanship scoring from bulls-eye scoring to hits to shots percentage on reactive targets.

    Beyond that, I agree with Gabe when he says that the 'resistance' to killing is learned - just as fear is learned. His example of kids squashing bugs says it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •