[Tyr.]

Originally Posted by dr2005

Please don't infer assumptions on my behalf. It's not very good form. I make no such assumption - I merely pointed out it's still a conscious process. Conscious =/= rational.

Seeing as how we have already beaten this Martin vs Zimmerman thing to death, I will use my own actions as an example.

I was doing urban training a few months ago where my squad was practicing the clearing of buildings. The team would approach the structure from one side, breach the door (Or window/roof/etc) and then proceed to clear the building. For the purposes of training, instructors had fitted the buildings with shooting targets who were to be our "enemy" for the day. We were using blank cartridges in our service rifles, as well as various other pyrotechnics to simulate a full on urban assault.

As usual, I breached the front door and we entered. Too tight to do the usual drill, so right after breaching I continued to push into the structure in lead. We got to the first room, and my partner and myself did the usual room clearance drill. Empty, except for a cupboard on the far side. We assumed we were up against the carboard cutout targets, so what happened next took us entirely by surprise.

One of the instructors came flying out of the cupboard and launched himself at us, screaming "Don't shoot! Don't shoot!" but at the same time running straight for us. I was standing in the room corner, with my weapon at low ready (So in my shoulder, but pointing downwards). I got my weapon in the aim, released safety and double tapped him in the chest before he got halfway across the room. That was entirely subconscious. The after-action report on that building clearance was difficult - because I had theoretically shot and killed one of my own troops wearing our uniform. That's not something to be taken lightly.

Thing is, I couldn't even explain the rationale behind what I did. It wasn't the right thing or the wrong thing to do. I just instinctively reacted, and my body did what it did without having any input from the frontal lobe in my brain. There was no time to apply a conscious thought process. There is very sound psychological evidence behind this sort of behavior (If you want to read more, look for Deep Survival, by Laurence Gonzales) is actually a result of natural evolution.

If I had stopped at that exact moment, standing there with my rifle at low ready, and applied a conscious logical system to come to the appropriate reaction, I would have failed my teammates. The time it takes for the eyes to receive the right information (What is he doing, how fast is he moving, what is in his hands, what is his intent, what is his facial expression telling me, what is he wearing, what is going on around me?) is far too long. Had he been a hostile, in the time it would take for me to come to a conscious decision, I could have been killed. Or worse, my teammates would have died for my failure.

What we use instead, are emotions. Do not confuse me use of the term "emotions" with "feelings". I am not talking about happy, sad, angry etc. I am talking about an instantaneous emotional response your body has when you are faced with a specific situation.

When you see a naked women, your body reacts by increasing blood flow to the genitals, pupils dilate, skin flushes etc. That all happens before you have the chance to actually apply a conscious decision making model to the situation. You don't see a naked women and apply a conscious decision making model, the end result of which is you decide to be aroused. Doesn't work that way. It's highly emotive. Stashed away in the primate part of your brain, you have instinctively and subconsciously red-flagged the sight of a naked women, and it has been paired with the response of "Arousal".

Have you ever been surprised by someone? That is the same concept. Your brain does not logically think "This person should not be here. What is going on? Perhaps I should go into a defensive posture to properly react?". No. Fuck no. Epinephrine and cortisone floods your system instantly, because your subconscious has flagged the situation of "Unknown intruder" as something which requires a defensive posture. That is why you are able to be surprised, even if it is somebody you know well. The rational decision of "Wait, that is just my girlfriend" is a lot slower than the instinctive emotional reaction you had, which is why you have that split second beforehand of defensiveness and surprise, which then quickly goes away.

Because your brain does this sort of stuff subconsciously. When I was standing at low-ready in that kill-house room, my brain had already experienced close quarter combat, so it had red flagged the situation of "You are under attack" and my brain subconsciously knew that the response to that is "Fight back". I didn't need to sit there and think about it. My subconscious kicked into gear as soon as that door opened and somebody was coming at me. I was well trained in weapon drills, so my brain also subconsciously knew how to raise the weapon into the aim, release the safety and fire a double tap. That's why I faced the moment right afterwards of "Woah, what the fuck, that happened before I even had the chance to think". It's a survival mechanism that we all have.

Violence happens very, very quickly. It is not always a conscious process. When I first come into contact, the reaction of "Hit the deck" is not conscious. It just happens. That is not a conscious process. You react the way your brain subconsciously knows how to. That's why some people flounder, panic and stall when in dangerous situations. Because they have no emotional bookmark to refer to, and they end up just shitting themselves. Throw a ball at a sporty guy, and he'll probably either dodge it or catch it. Throw it at some non-sporty girl, and she'll freak the fuck out. A person will revert to their most base self during those moments.

Now, I won't go on to talk too much about Martin vs Zimmerman. But think about what I have just said. The same way I highly doubt Zimmerman just decided to stop and kill a black man (The psychology of which I described in an earlier post) I also highly doubt there was much conscious thought process going on during any struggle. Personally, I doubt I would be capable of deciding during a close quarter struggle to go for a wounding shot. Especially when somebody is mere inches away. I personally just don't have the mental capacity to be doing that during a hand to hand fight. Some people might have a lot more experience and training than me, and they are capable of doing that without thinking too much. Zimmerman, though? No, I doubt it. I suspect all he knew was that he was under attack, and his instincts were screaming "USE THE GUN! USE THE GUN!". Nowhere in there was the logical thought of "Well, I better obey the law here. I should use a non-lethal combatives hold to subdue this opponent, because applying too much force would be immoral and illegal, and I might face consequences afterwards".

Yes, a groin strike would have been the logical thing to do. But you know as well as I do that (Unless you are well trained in combatives) if I came at you, and starting fucking your shit up, you wouldn't be able to properly execute a groin strike. If I asked you afterwards why not, you'd tell me it was just too difficult, couldn't think of how to do it, couldn't think while being attacked etc. Sure, maybe you'd pull it off. But you can't say that with certainty. (Hey, I don't know you that well, maybe you know how to handle yourself in a fight. Maybe you could manage it?). Hand to hand combatives isn't easy.

Everybody ignored my last post I made. I assumed it was because most people couldn't quite handle the idea of somebody applying the known psychology of killing and combat to the shitheap which is this thread. Which is sad, really.

- Tyr