Why Do Cops Give Terrible Self Defense Advice? 

Support the channel by downloading Hunting Clash: huntingclash.link/hard2hurt Use code HUNTWITHHARD2HURT for bonus in game perks!

I have drawn my firearm (although never pointed it at someone) in order to prevent violence from occurring on two separate occasions. Killing someone is a big deal. regardless of how badass you think you are, its gonna cause you some serious, long term, mental issues. I served 4 years in the navy, and have friends who did spec-war shit who struggle with that daily. You should never kill someone unless you absolutely have to, and shooting someone generally kills them. Anyone who gives advice that you should unnecessarily kill someone, for any reason, is not a person you should listen to.

Sounds more like a misinterpretation of the firearms safety rule to never point a gun at something/someone that you're not willing to shoot. "Willing" as in "ok with" not "wanting"

I have actually protected my family from trying to break into our hotel room by grabbing my gun, pointed, and saying: "stop, or I'll shoot" and that was enough to stop them right then and there.

watching icy mike talk about a hunting video game feels weird. not really the type of sponsor i'd expect from him lol

This is awesome! I'm making video lectures about Introduction to Philosophy and Critical Thinking, and you're giving very good examples of exactly what I am talking about (a bit more abstractly)!

There are also some sociopaths out there who think that there are magic words in the law that permits them to just murder someone if they happen to step onto their property.

Icy Mike is a cool dudr

"Everywhere that has laws--you can find those laws, and you can read them." This is gold--always teaching more than the subject and managing to make me laugh at the same time.

I've drawn and NOT fired several times. Three men with a hammer, pipe, and piece of rebar stopped and dropped that stuff when I drew; no need to shoot anybody. A pilot trying to run a roadblock and run us over with his plane (long story) stopped when we drew our pistols. The use of deadly force in self-defense can be very complicated. Very smart people get it wrong, and any idiot can find themselves in a situation where they have to figure it out.

That "you gotta shoot if you draw" stuff sounds like a red flag against whoever told that to you. Like, the only reason I can think of for someone to come to this conclusion is that they drew when their life was clearly not in danger and ended up threatening someone, and subsequent legal action made them bitter about the whole ordeal

I have heard my whole life that you SHOULDN'T pull a weapon unless you are WILLING to use it. I have NEVER heard ANYONE say that if you pull a weapon, you MUST use it.

"Well... this dude with a G.E.D. and two years of writing speeding tickets says I have to MERK you now, so..." Dude, amazing. Hahahaha. This is one of your best vids.

I was told "never point a loaded gun at anything unless you're planning to shoot at it" as a conscript thirty years ago. But honestly that was more in the context of gun safety than self defense or anything else. I guess if you're calling up roughly 80% of young men to do military service (as Sweden was at this time) you want as many "layers" of "foolproof" rules as possible regarding guns, because you're basically guaranteed to have plenty of fools with guns around.

The phrase, "like children, or rookie cops" can be slapped on so many other scenarios LMAO

What's scary is people who can't work this out in under a minute are allowed to own firearms. Thanks for pointing out how dumb comments about self defence in the UK are as well. Good stuff.

I was trained in the Army. I don't know where you got your "military" information. My platoon was taught that we do not draw a firearm or point a firearm at someone if you are only going to use it for intimidation. That is what police training teaches, I have a buddy who got police training after service. His opinion was no wonder police shoot people so much. Police are trained in a VERY different way than Military. Police are still civilians. Civilians do not have the same training for situations in an active combat zone. Military are trained for combat zones. Police are not in deadly situations 24/7, and still draw their firearms and kill other civilians for no other reason other than bias based beliefs. Not saying that a military personnel cannot have biased beliefs, but I do know we (in the military) are trained to handle situation where we know everyone can be considered a danger until they are proven to not be. So as military at a check point in a combat zone. A small child who walks towards a check point in an active warzone, isn't going to automatically be allowed to approach and not identify themselves at a safe distance for those at the check point. (a lot further than 20 feet, 20 feet is still considered death zone for explosions) They could be a suicide bomber, whether willing or not. You need to make sure the situation warrants a firearm being used in a combat zone situation. Anyone refusing to follow instructions in an active war zone, and stop at what the check point considers a safe distance, will be fire on. If you are using just a pistol at an active combat zone check point, that is stupid, as a pistol isn't as accurate at distance as a rifle is. A pistol is a firearm of last resort in the active war zone situations, because it does not have the accuracy at range that a rifle does. Police Check points are not considered war zone check points, and as police, you would be less likely to have a suicide bomber approaching you. Firearms (for military or police) are not, and should not, be used (pulled or pointed at another) as intimidation tools. They were made to kill, so unless you do not care if you accidently kill someone because you "accidently" pull a trigger from feeling unsafe, life threatened, or just hopped up on adrenaline. Go ahead, you just became a murderer, even if the person was innocent and you kill them. If you shoot them, as military or police, even if they are not innocent, you are not a judge, jury, nor executioner. You are a law enforcement officer who should not be Kill first, kill second, then ask questions. You, as a police officer, are not in a combat zone. Criminals have upgraded their weapons in response to police upgrading their weapons. Death is death. Weapons for killing are weapons for killing. You cannot make them completely safe, even with rubber coated metal balls or bean bags. You can still kill a person with any high velocity wireless device (ammunition). A firearm (used by military, police, or anyone) is a tool for killing others. Nothing more or less. Does not matter when you pull a firearm, whether you pull the trigger or not, it is still a tool for killing another being. You have elevated the situation to a deadly situation by drawing a firearm. A person (military, police, or average citizen) who handles firearms NEEDS to understand that they (firearms) ARE NOT TOYS. That they (the person using firearm) cannot recall ammunition once fired, and cannot make excuses about why they should not be the one responsible for that ammunition killing (or harming) the one shot by their firearm. I was taught that in the military, it is what I know from using firearms, and nothing can convince me that pulling a firearm on a person will not potentially cause that person's death. Especially if the person using that tool of death decides to use that firearm when they startle, get scared, or are just hopped up on adrenaline. Accidents happen, and a tool of death can become a fatal accident that you cannot recall, no matter how much you want that to happen. A person who does not understand that, or can sleep well after something like that, is either numbed to it or wanted to kill someone in the first place. Even you, hard2hurt, have said that adrenaline inducing situations, you lose fine motor control when the "fight or flight" adrenaline has started effecting you. Your first thought is to grab the MOST DEADLY, tool of death, you have access to to try to "intimidate or dissuade" someone when you have impaired motor control? That is a stupid reaction or response when you KNOW your motor control is impaired. This is why military are drilled, taught how to function during combat situations, and have it drilled that firearms are the weapons of last resort to protect and save as many lives as possible in active combat zones. It is to lessen that "fight or flight" function, the effect that impairs your motor control, until after the situation has been resolved. You (in the military) are taught that you can fall apart (allow the "fight or flight" response to effect you) after the situation is no longer immediately dangerous and everyone is as safe as they can be.

I agree, those sayings are dumb. If you can pull your gun and diffuse a deadly situation without anyone getting hurt,, that's a win in my book.

I might be wrong on this, as I'm not american and so I had never heard that. But there's a saying you hear sometimes in Canada ( and I'm guessing elsewhere just as well ) which is : you should never pull a firearm unless you a READY to shoot. ( The logic being, if you escalate the situation with a gun, without being ready to use it if necessary, you've just made the whole thing more dangerous for everyone involved ). Is it possible it's that saying that got transformed over time ?

You never draw your weapon without the conviction to pull the trigger if neccessary.

It's been a couple of years now that I have been watching your channel, and the sudden revelation that you were not just an FTO, but an FTO of FTOs.... It's a near religious epiphany that explains everything from your sense of humor, the lack of hair, the necessity of finding a job where you can be paid to do terrible, often hilarious things to others (and yourself.) Truly, a moment of enlightenment. 🤣👍🏼

That whole "if I draw it, I fire it" thing is from an Elmore Leonard book. I can't recall exactly which one, but I believe that it is a Raylan Givens quote.

When your logical fallacies kick you in the nut you double down and say something stupider. Or you call the person that pointed it out a snowflake. Or both.

Regarding the reasonable use of force for self defence in the uk. Brits are regularly subjected to the idea that we can’t defend ourselves. Patently false but it’s too much like hard work digging deeper than the sensational, exaggerated (often false) headlines in uk media. Any other brits here? Check out “the secret barrister: fake law” book. It’s great and breaks down some famous law based urban myths

I've never even heard of this. Lol. Only thing I've heard similar is, "If you do shoot, you shoot for center mass" This isn't fallout, you don't get to pick limbs. Then if you actually say that you aimed for a limb, your "fearing for your life" defense comes into question. Not too life threatening if you felt the need to only maim.. then your whole defense will snowball under pressure.

The difference in drawing a weapon and using a weapon is NO ONE dies! That simple. The only thing with drawing and pointing it at a person is the intimidation factor.

I would love to see more of this content from you. I think this is one of the areas that you are the only voice I hear discussing these topics with expertise.

I learned "if you draw your gun, you have to shoot," but it DIDN'T mean 'you're obligated to shoot.' It meant, 'if you don't HAVE to shoot them, why did you draw your gun?' (Assuming that they continue doing what they were doing.) So, it wasn't a lesson about shooting people. It was a lesson on not drawing your gun unless you definitely, 100% need it. Do those caveats totally fix the saying, make it slightly better, or is it still just as dumb that way?

I believe there was a situation where a DA prosecuted someone for “brandishing” when rioters demanded he get out of his vehicle. That situation is both confusing and messed up from a legal perspective.

I would play hunting clash if you could hunt other hunters too. Just saying.

He is right, if you draw your gun you are not legally required to shoot somebody with it. In fact millions of people every year in America use their gone purely as a deterrent. However, I would say if you do dry your gun you should definitely be READY to use it. In the military the first and most important rule for weapons is the one I still live by now. "NEVER Point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot." Now, that doesn't mean you should always shoot, BUT if you draw your weapon and your attacker is not deterred, you should be prepared and willing to squeeze that trigger!

You bring up some good points! One problem certainly is that people tend to overestimate the fighting abilities of both police officers and soldiers. The idea that police officers and soldiers spend daily with fighting people unarmed is fantasy, we live in a time of guns, pepper spray and tasers, most conflicts are not resolved by throwing bare fists.

I believe the proper term is "Don't draw your weapon unless you are WILLING to use it" (i.e., mentally prepared, IF circumstances require it), not that you MUST use it. I guess it needs to be explained better, like so many things these days.

You should talk to the RU-vidr; Law of Self Defense about these subjects. He's a lawyer who specializes in use of force and self defense cases and i think you two could give us insight on the legal and practical stuff around protecting yourself using force. Also, 🚫🍞.

The idea of “you cant draw a firearm unless you will use it” when i was brought up was more of a mental thing, like pulling my firearm changes the situation, and to only pull it if its my life or theres, so its more of a keep it on my side unless someone needs to be shot

XD do people who aren't from the streets say this? It's only true when your enemy will come back to finish the job. Lol I've pulled out my machete at least 12 times, and I have never had to swing it at a single person.

Outstanding (and hilarious) video, Mike! My only critique (sort of) is that I think you're underselling your intuition. I don't think you "just guessed." I believe that what we call "intuition" is actually our unconscious awareness of the vast volume of non-verbal information that we constantly process. And I believe that frequent exposure to situations in which that information is essential helps us overcome the social training that teaches us to ignore it. In short, all that time facing threats taught you to respect your intuition, rather than to drown it out. That's an essential lesson for self-defense, in my view.

Well when your logical fallacies catch up to you I think you're supposed to block your ears and go with the most outrageous version.

Yeah I think that happens to a lot of us where it if it's a knife or even an egg it doesn't matter you could be holding it and then suddenly when you're surprised by somebody like a cop or a friend and they're saying you know what are you doing with this or with that and you just honestly don't realize I'm holding a knife or an egg or whatever happens to be in my hand you just don't think about it because in that moment you're not thinking murder kill destroy you just happen to be holding it I mean I hold a knife in my house every so often so if somebody knocks on my door and sees me walk in front of the door with a knife in my hand that doesn't mean I'm plotting on murdering somebody is just simply that I grabbed the knife for no reason and I was just goofing around or I was going to actually cut something or I was cutting something like a package or whatever that I just received or I was just looking at it just for the hell of it sometimes I do that and you just don't think about it so it's very fortunate and thank God that you did not panic and accidentally hurt the guy with the knife because most other cops that are not as well trained they would have just seen a guy holding a knife saying oh hi how are you and they would have just shot him right there and that's crazy that's scary because you know in our society we don't always feel like we're in danger or that we have to be the danger so if you're holding a weapon just for fun in your own home and suddenly a cop comes to your door you may not really think or process in your head I've got a weapon he's a cop I shouldn't approach him

Hope no one hates on mike for doing an ad for a mobile game. Get that money

I’ve gotten that advice before and I always take it as “if you draw your gun, be ready to shoot.” As in don’t take it out unless you are prepared to pull the trigger and kill someone. That’s a little different than “if you draw your gun, you absolutely have to shoot.” If the attacker runs away then obviously you don’t have to shoot them.

Here's my concern though: pulling a deadly weapon on somebody, even in self-defense, can (and often will be) easily spun into a felony menacing charge. I know this from experience as my ex and I were attacked in the city by some relatives of my ex who basically wanted us to break up as they didn't approve of our relationship (we are LGBT, and they were against us being a couple). They got very aggressive and came at us and I pulled a knife to "keep them at bay". Trying to "tactically" not hurt them, but you know, give them a reason to re-think their aggression. -It worked. They did, in fact, rethink their aggression and backed off. They also called the police, and I was charged with menacing. The charge was later dropped (my ex hired a lawyer), who was able to convince the DA it was self-defense. BUT, we had the money for a lawyer. If we didn't, if we had been poorer (and my ex had to sell our macbook's just to pay the lawyer), then I very likely would have ended up with a felony. One of the shitty aspects of the American legal system is that it does this. It penalizes people for using the *threat* of deadly force, to *prevent* the deadly force from ever being necessary. It often assumes that someone pulling a weapon is doing so as a bad guy: if the other people call the cops first. Which really sucks. And can ruin some people's lives. In the case of my ex and I, the way it went down is it was *presumed* that we were in the wrong. We got the charges dropped, but it still cost us thousands to do it, and we didn't get that money back. I also spent 30 days in jail while we were doing the lawyer and court thing. Which sucked, and was terrifying. And enormously stressful. And that experience, has really made me rethink the use of carrying deadly weapons as a means of self-defense. Because *unless* I'm actually willing to kill the person (which in 99% of cases is not necessary), I may loose thousands in attorney fees convincing the courts that it was self-defense. Nowadays I carry a mace pepper gun, and a tactical flashlight. If I pull and *use* those, I know I'm not going to get a menacing charge for doing so. (Nobody's going to mistake a hot pink mace pepper gun for a deadly weapon). And it's easy for me to defend the use of that if someone is acting crazy. And they both act as a deterrent ( an ultrabright light in someone's eyes will definitely get them to rethink things, and the threat of a face full of mace will definitely cause people to reconsider), and something I can legit use on someone if I need to. And in either case, I'm not likely to get into serious legal trouble for doing so. PLUS, I'd rather not kill somebody if I can help it. And the problem with deadly weapons: is they're deadly. I'd rather incapacitate someone than kill them, any day of the week. One thing to keep in mind, Mike, is you are an ex-cop. If you ended up in a situation like mine, it would be easier for you to talk to the officers and explain to them that as a former police supervisor you felt the need to pull your weapon in self-defense. In a court, you could easily argue the case, that you are both an ex police supervisor, and a professional self-defense trainer, and so are an "expert" and therefor in your expert opinion, felt the situation justified pulling your weapon. For ordinary folks though, they don't have that kind of "inside" experience, and so often just feel threatened for their life or safety and just do what's instinctual to protect themselves. In my case, I felt genuinely threatened for my and my ex's life and safety and so pulled a knife to keep the attacker at bay. But we still lost thousands as a result. Just adding this bit for what it's worth. I agree, people don't need to shoot if they pull a weapon. 100% But people also need to be prepared that the moment that weapon comes out of its holster, or the moment they draw that knife, they may be facing a felony charge, that they have to fight off at their own expense.

The title sounds very click baitey, however since you probably watch Mike's content AKA a former cop, you already knew cops give bad self-defense tips.

if you cant raid shadow legends you cant fight

You’ll get charged if you pull that trigger, even if you are justified.

Pretty much similar laws in Germany - even with (a lot) stricter gun control.

Goof: appeals to the authority of a cop Mike: I'm the cop that trains the cop training other cops to be cops

lol, I don't take _any_ advice from cops.

Pointing a gun when you are not threaten is dejure assault.

I always thought, and have told others never draw/present a firearm unless you are WILLING to fire. That always has, and STILL makes sense to me. If I present a firearm while I am unable to pull the trigger, I have now escalated the stakes in that confrontation despite an unwillingness to engage with those stakes. This is literally the first time I have ever heard the "If you draw you have to fire" and that doesn't even make sense to me. Some states explicitly allow for a "Defensive Display" of a firearm, and in the other states, I can't imagine any person being arrested for NOT killing someone.

Critical Thinking and Logic 1301 with Professor Icy Mike

Haven't watched the video yet, but I'm guessing the reason most cops give bad self-defense advice is qualified immunity.

I honestly can not think of a single time in my life, where walking away was not a realistic option.

"I'm not sure what you're supposed to do when your logical fallacies catch up to you." I cackled. 😂😂😂

Happy to see you getting a cool sponsor bro. Dunning-Kruger rears it's head a lot in the "self-defense law" arena and I think you hit the nail on the head.

Love you and the channel bro!

I usually love your videos. The title of this one had me excited, but it seemed to cover the one quote more than anything. I would disagree that self-defense is not really that different for law enforcement. First off, most people don't have a team of backup they can radio in, and that alone can make a huge difference. Secondly, depending on your state, you may have a duty to retreat (not all states are stand your ground). Police on the other hand never have any duty to retreat from a self-defense situation because as you said, they can stay and do what they feel is necessary to arrest the person or in many instances, just kill them. There is also the fear factor to consider, people are more hesitant to strike an officer because they know it will come with elevated charges where they may easily get away with a street attack. While an officer is supposed to use minimal force to repel an attacker, as you've pointed out, things like the 21-foot rule get made up and then police use that to justify shooting someone for almost nothing, like the 75-year-old woman with dementia who was recently shot in her home. Police unions often fight for those police and get them a reduced sentence of get the charges dropped completely. Citizens are not usually presented with a union to help them fight legal charges if a self-defense situation does arise. When you consider all those variables, I would say the reason you shouldn't take self-defense advice from police is because it is so different for them. It's like a rocket scientist trying to give advice to a heart surgeon, they are in different worlds with different goals, the same processes simply won't work.

What the law says you can do without going to prison and what you realistically CAN do without going to prison in the UK are unfortunately 2 different things...

Thank you for posting this video as I am so tired of seeing morons post that "required to shoot" nonsense also.

I think there is also a more general problem with statements that people have heard several times. They no longer try to think critically about them. Sometimes, when something that contradicts such statements is obviously happening in front of them, they prefer the repeated statement and ignore what they see. Not only "them", I have also caught myself doing it.

"The ROE is always the same, sir...kill who needs killing, don't kill who don't need killing." Outstanding vid. Common sense, clearly presented.

It is for legal reasons - when you point a gun at somebody, you might shoot the person by mistake. This is why they say that you should not point a loaded weapon at anything that you do not intend to shoot.

My father was a firearms instructor in the military. (NCOIC of CATM) Being a young moron as a child, who has arguably not improved much in cognition, my father used a variation of that phrase in teaching me about guns. But there is a key difference in the wording, "Do not point a gun at anything you are not planning to shoot." The key word is planning. The goal was to impress upon me the seriousness of waving a gun around and that it is not a toy. But you might change your PLAN to shoot someone or something based on new information, like the one you articulated about your neighbor warning you about a fire. I have never heard that if you draw a gun you MUST shoot. I think the wording, and thus the intent of the maxim, has been changed through the telephone game.

In Sweden the rule is (for real) that if you point a wepon at a person you must have legal reason to shoot or an situation where you have a legal reson to shoot must be imminent. Thats what the legal department in the swedish police has said. We also have a "rule" saiyng can, allowed, should when it comes to all use of force.

I was told don’t pull it unless you have every intention of using it. But you don’t have to shoot. It will hopefully keep you from having to shoot.

I've definitely heard variations of these "rules". Being from Wisconsin, it's common to hear sometimes. Although, I did take criminal justice classes in college and there was talk about such things. But I don't remember much. I do remember that you can't legally shoot people in the back unless they're armed and there's a reasonable possibility that that'd hurt others. And, cops are held to a higher standard than private citizens. A civilian could get away with a slap on the wrist for something a cop would get canned for, because they're supposed to know better. Be a better example and uphold the law. Those classes is also where I learned about the "21ft rule."

Idk man seems like Mitch had it coming

Thank you for sharing this information and what you said can be put to debate. And buy the way i have hit the red button for you and i rang the bell for you too. Great channel.

People who are telling you this didn't understand the information they were given. What the officer was probably trying to say is that if you drew your weapon in self-defense and didn't have to shoot it you might find yourself in a questionable legal situation on whether or not it was appropriate for you to draw your weapon in the first place.

sounds like it started off along the lines of 'you can only draw your gun if you were justified to use your gun' that condensed over time to 'if you draw your gun you have to use your gun'.

in the army, the only thing I was told that was similar to this, was don't fire warning shots and don't shoot to wound. if you must fire your weapon, shoot with the intent to kill.

I've always taught my son: Do not draw unless you're WILLING to use it; this reinforces two things: 1) we don't aim at things for fun-- it's a weapon and is intended to kill. 2) do not flash your weapon without intention as an exposed weapon isn't just a danger to your target, it's a danger to you as well. Otherwise, I didn't know people were saying if you draw you HAVE to use it, that's not only dumb, it's terrible gun safety.

A cop once told me "if i don't use it, I'll lose it" I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about guns. Maybe relationship or money advice.

Drawing my weapon? Is your warning. Taking aim? Means I'm gonna immediately mag dump. That? Is my training. And that? Is all the "warning" anyone gets. Nothing? About my training. Should ever be misconstrued as advice. Since 99.9% of ya'll? Have never and will never face an actual life or death scenario.

This video made me realize how much I don't know about the rules in the country I currently live in or even my own home country. It's...pretty alarming and I should probably do research or consult experts on these things. Thank you for making me realize that.

The knife incident you mentioned wouldn’t have struck me as a danger scenario. Maybe it’s because I’m not a cop and I’m not regularly in conflict, but if I was approaching a STRANGER’S HOME and met eyes with them through the window I would be overwhelmingly conscious that I was the stranger in that situation. I don’t blame the guy for holding a knife in his own home (probably near his kitchen, around dinner time), and becoming a tad hyperfocused when he saw a stranger yelling at him through the window, forgetting he was holding something in favor of seeing why this stranger suddenly appeared. I thought this would’ve been common intuition.

Honestly, I have never heard any cop give the advice that if you draw, you MUST shoot them. As you explained, that is objectively terrible advice. The closest advice I've ever received to that is you should never draw a gun unless you have CAUSE and WILLINGNESS to shoot them. Cause helps with legality (e.g., don't draw your gun because some schmuck pissed you off). If you can't legitimately explain why you shot them later, they're probably going to call it murder. 🤣 Willingness is important in case the one you're aiming at escalates and goes for a weapon and is more willing to shoot you (e.g., making yourself a deadly threat will likely make your opponent respond with deadly force, even when he /she may not have before).

Been carrying guns professionally for over 20 hrs I have never heard anyone say that……

I think that all this video answers to a non existent question. No sane cop would say to you “don’t draw a gun unless you’re GONNA use it” They may say “don’t draw a gun unless you’re WILLING to use it” which I consider the sanest advice for any gun owning person. Even if they do say the “GONNA” verb…I’d attribute that to poor English. In communication you have to go for reasonable meaning and not for literal silliness. On the other hand there are blackout challenges now so I may be a fossil that thinks logic is implied…who knows? :)

I should not own a fire-arm. How do I know that? Because the first thing that pop into my head from your story: ”are you legally justified to shoot an Eight-year-old who comes towards you with a knife”. Like c’mon brain, wtf?!! I skip buying guns and bullets and invest on weekly psychotherapy instead.

LOL I'm a cop and 100% agree with all of this. It's worth pointing out that cops shouldn't be giving legal advice anyway, but the idea that you HAVE to shoot someone is idiotic. Appreciate what you're doing Brother. Stay safe.

Guy tried to rob me in a Phoenix parking lot. He didn't like my side arm. He left. I knew cops would come, unloaded, & left rack open, & placed safely in open view. Cop shook my hand, no arrest.

You should not draw a weapon if you are not PREPARED to use it. It might not stop the attack. It escalates the threat of serious violence. The attacker could take you weapon and use it against you. But! this is not the same as saying, if you draw a weapon, you MUST USE it. Maybe some people can’t make the distinction between the two?

I don't understand how anyone gives the "advice" you are rightfully criticizing.

Commenting solely based on title before I watch. Will edit afterwards. This sounds like a corruption of the more reasonable concept that “you shouldn’t draw your firearm if lethal force isn’t justified”. I can see how someone might hear that and think “oh so I have to shoot if I draw” even though that’s like… the reverse of what the original statement is. Edit: 5 minutes in and whew you’re spitting fire on the people who use appeal to authority 😂 although as a comment, you mentioned that the standard for use of force in self defense is the same for civilians and police, and that’s mostly right from what I understand but technically juries are instructed to review police use of force from the standard of “a reasonable officer” which entails assuming higher levels of training, responsibilities and knowledge than a “reasonable person”. I remember learning a bit about that from when I was learning about the Clapham omnibus Edit: 8 minutes, lol at the simpleton line. Made me chuckle. Edit: end of video. Yeah this checks out. I’m glad I wasn’t too far off your intended point. Honestly in terms of “plain English explanation of use of force”, Massad Ayoob’s Judicious Use of Lethal Force lecture here on RU-vid has been one of the most enlightening ones.

Self defence is not illegal in the UK. It's what you said, "reasonable force". The problem here is that "reasonable force" is very narrowly interpreted. It essentially spins on if they were coming at you or backing off. The classic example is of the burglar who climbs in your bedroom window. If you wake up while he's climbing in, push him out and he dies, that's fine. But if you wake up while he's climbing out with your TV, you can't touch him. Pushing him out would be excessive force (you know he's leaving and presents no threat), dragging him back in for a beating is illegal detention. There's no right to "stand your ground" here; unless you're attacked in your own home, or going to someone else's rescue, you are obliged to retreat before resorting to violence. There is likewise no right to detain the perp until the police arrive. So the law is stacked against "reasonable" self defence here.

I like Mike's videos, but it shouldn't take "years of experience and intuition" to know that you shouldn't literally kill someone just bc they're walking in their house with a knife... and there's a storm door between the two of you. Mike kinda makes it sound like shooting/killing that guy was the default option. Pretty dark man... pretty fucked up...

UK force has to be reasonable and proportionate. Not the easiest thing to define..........

Are they confusing showing the gun without drawing it. Cause you can't just tell them to back off cause you could use a gun, and NEVER Fire A Warning shot,

I don’t know what it is about you and trying to put down law enforcement. I’ve literally never heard anyone say that you absolutely have to shoot if you aim your gun at someone, or that you shouldn’t draw your gun unless you are going to shoot. What I HAVE been told during my training and by other officers is that you shouldn’t aim your gun at something/someone you’re not prepared to shoot or something/someone you don’t intend to shoot. The context of this is always about responsibly handling your weapon. It’s not that complex.

Short answer; because they're cops and they carry a gun for a living they think they know what they're talking about because they carry a gun for a living. Also, the "I'm not sure what you're supposed to do when your logical fallacies catch up to you" line is pure gold, and I'm stealing it.

I guess objectively reasonable applies almost everywhere on the world. And the myths evolve because people lie and/or don't think. Here in Austria we had those ... "You're not allowed to defend yourself anymore". Yes because you kept hitting the guy after he went already went down and wasn't a threat anymore.🤦

Gonna have to hard disagree here. Drawing your gun and not firing leaves you in an incredibly awkward state where you've shown your hand, you've escalated, and now you're just standing there pointing a gun at someone. I've heard this from extremely experienced guys before, none of which were cops. In fact it's cops that are usually the ones pointing a gun at someone in an attempt to de-escalate, and achieving the exact opposite. Thanks to the internet, we have lots of videos of people awkwardly standing there, or even backpedaling because they are caught in this loop of "IM GOING TO SHOOT YOU!!" and then the guy starts walking towards them... but they haven't shot yet, so why shoot now? "TAKE ONE MORE STEP AND IM GOING TO SHOOT YOU!!!" Well 10 steps later, they're still backpedaling, pointing a gun at a guy moving towards them. It'd be far better and safer for them to just not draw the gun in the first place until they had reached the point of no return where they needed to fire, in all of these scenarios.

Mmm does the video game have jackolope? Cause I only hunt jackolope . . . So, tasty.

This man referenced hunterxhunter while doing a sponsorship for a hunting game that’s crazy to me.

Our local Sheriffs Office gives free firearms training for CWPs. I don't know where your at but I have never heard any cop say this.

They say it in the classic horror film Phantasm. The guy saying it; is saying it to his 14 year old brother. Lol. I recall hearing it the first time, and thinking “what?? That’s stupid.”

Sooo I saw the thumbnail and totally called what made this video happen 🤣. What's funny about those arguments in the 21ft rule video, is that almost everyone was aware that it's not right to discharge your firearm and the advice is stupid. Well... except for some over zealous people who litterally thought we believed we had to shoot someone or go to jail... But most of us said we dont agree with it and it's stupid but it is what cops say. Something like " this is what the cops say. They say you have to shoot if you draw" Now this raises the question. "Always check with local law enforcement " vs " they're not supposed to give legal advice"

A college buddy drew his pistol from under the bed and shot someone standing in the doorway to his bedroom. He succeeded! It was his girlfriend trying to surprise him. She succeeded! Luckily, she survived and they eventually got married - they were a great couple, really - but he radically changed his firearms habits. She didn't even have to tell him.

What's qualified immunity.? I've been hearing people talk a lot about this lately.