Colonel Boyd was a USAF fighter pilot whose innovative theories changed aircraft acquisition and military tactical planning.
His two greatest contributions to military theory were studies in energy management and the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act decision loop (popularly known as the "OODA loop").
After WW2, the new US Air Force acquisition approach was skewed toward faster, heavier, and consequently less maneuverable aircraft. Military strategists wanted aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons to enemy targets in Europe quickly. They also needed fast aircraft with the ability to destroy Soviet bombers before they reached US territory.
Boyd rejected this premise, believing instead a fighter aircraft's primary trait should be maneuverability, not high speed. Boyd drew his conclusions from his experience in the Korean War, where the ability to transition from one maneuver to another quickly was more important than ceiling or max airspeed.
A maneuverable aircraft allowed the pilot to cycle through the OODA loop faster, giving him an advantage over his adversary. In other words, whoever processed the relevant data then reacted was more likely to win.
Boyd promoted his view to anyone who would listen. As is typical in bureaucracies, Boyd's thinking was too far ahead of the herd, so he was relegated to offices away from the Pentagon.
Nevertheless, Boyd and his supporters (the self-styled "fighter mafia") waged a relentless struggle to change Air force thinking.
The result was a series of lightweight, maneuverable fighters, with the F-16 Fighting Falcon the epitome of maneuverable post-war fighter.
A maneuverable aircraft allowed the pilot to cycle through the OODA loop faster, giving him an advantage over his adversary. In other words, whoever processed the relevant data then reacted was more likely to win.
 |
| The OODA Loop from COL Boyd's Briefing |
Nevertheless, Boyd and his supporters (the self-styled "fighter mafia") waged a relentless struggle to change Air force thinking.
The result was a series of lightweight, maneuverable fighters, with the F-16 Fighting Falcon the epitome of maneuverable post-war fighter.
What's This Have To Do With Personal Defense?
Well.... it has everything to do with personal defense -- perhaps even more in a civilian situation, since we don't have sophisticated Friend or Foe sensors, radar, predetermined rules of engagement, wingmen, AWACS....
Colonel Boyd very succinctly summarized the key activities in any engagement, and the OODA loop is applicable to many situations besides air-to-air combat.
But with a slight difference.
Fighter pilots in air-to-air combat must continually orient themselves and the trajectory of the airplane with the threat. The opposing pilot's airplanes are moving continuously across three dimensions: up, down, right, left or some combination (a climbing right turn, for example), and at varying speeds (one of Boyd's signature moves required a rapid turn which reduced velocity and changed aspect).
Civilians in defensive situations are typically not moving in three dimensions at high speeds.
We're moving in two dimensions on flat planes with only slight variations in height.
"Orientation" is a constant (except for those rare times when we are disoriented and have no idea where we are -- in this case a defensive shooting posture is probably not an option).
We're moving in two dimensions on flat planes with only slight variations in height.
"Orientation" is a constant (except for those rare times when we are disoriented and have no idea where we are -- in this case a defensive shooting posture is probably not an option).
Therefore I suggest we modify the Boyd OODA loop to Observe, Assess, Decide, Act, with "Secure" appended to the end once the cycle is complete.
The Observe stage should be normal every waking moment. Jeff Cooper advocated the color code levels of alertness, but I prefer low, medium, and high alert.
The Observe stage should be normal every waking moment. Jeff Cooper advocated the color code levels of alertness, but I prefer low, medium, and high alert.
Low alert is most of my day -- in familiar surroundings with known people in controlled environments (If I worked in a convenience store I wouldn't have this luxury).
Medium alert is the balance of the day -- driving, shopping, walking, bike riding. If I'm in public I'm aware of my surroundings, people in the immediate and moderate distance, and what my options are if something unexpected happens.
<rant>
This should be everyone's approach to driving, but Lazy Boy Recliner seats in rolling infotainment centers with theater surround sound have all conspired to insulate drivers from the reality. Today's cars are so quiet and comfortable that we forget we are hurtling down roads at deadly speeds.
Anyone who rides a motorcycle on public roads for a few years will tell you "They're all idiots." The low regard for the majority of drivers is based on observing stupidity daily. They don't look, they're distracted, and they have no concept of speed, effective braking distance. maneuver capabilities, or traction.
Since they're all idiots you have to ride as if EVERYONE is about to swerve, brake, tailgate, run red lights, pull out in front of you, cut you off. If you assume that you ride ready, because you don't have to think, "What just happened?"
You KNOW what' just happened and you react appropriately because you've considered it.
See kids playing fetch with a dog in the front yard?
Be prepared for the dog or kid to run out in front of you.
See the cell-phone distracted mother in the minivan waiting to pull out from the CVS lot?
Yep, she's going to "not see you" and pull out when you're 50' away.
You can only drive defensively when you are engaged and actively assessing the situation, conditions, potential threats near and far.
</rant>A safe approach is the get to medium alert the moment you step out the door into the public -- whether driving, walking, riding. Whatever places you in proximity to unknown people with unknown intentions exposes you to threats. Not all are criminal. in fact, most threatening situations are due to negligence or inattention.
High alert is reserved for situations that are rapidly evolving towards threatening.
Back to OADA....
The Observe, Assess, Decide, Act loop can be used in all threat levels. In fact it's best to make it a habit so there is no mental overload those times when you shift from low to high in moments (it happens).
Observe: be aware of your surroundings, people (known and unknown), posture, and anomalies -- things that don't belong or look out of place: a person leaving a backpack unattended, a car idling with lights off, people looking nervous or glancing at you then quickly away...
Assess: Your eyes and ears are open (there's a reason many muggers and assaults happen to people wearing earbuds), you're processing information, and you're making assessments every moment. The frequency and intensity of the assessments are situation dependent.
<rant>
In our hypersensitive world we're NOT to "assess", judge, predetermine, profile people unknown to us. There is some good intent here in that looks can be deceiving, and the "rough looking dude" might be a teddy bear whose only flaw is not calling his mom every week. Therefore the assessment must be done fairly and appropriately.
Assuming "all black young men" or "guys with tattoos" are threats is useless -- you will not be able to distinguish who actually is a threat.
Conversely, predetermining that "all Mormons are peaceful' might be a nice sentiment, but it's useless because you can't look at a person and determine if he or she is Mormon.
"So how am I supposed to assess if i can't pre-judge?"
Here's how: Become a better observer of people -- ALL people.
Good street cops know how to do this from long practice. Have you ever walked in a city where patrol officers are still on foot? You might be surprised to meet a gaze. They are assessing you -- your walk, demeanor, body type -- everything -- constantly. They're like tellers at a bank handling real money all day so that an anomaly -- a counterfeit -- is easy to spot.
Therefore carrying a defensive firearm should make you less prejudiced, less bigoted, and less close-minded because you take people one at a time, on their own terms, and not wrapped in a bunch of preconceived notions.
</rant>
This assessment is not merely "Is this situation dangerous?"
Civilians are constrained by practical (available weapons, ballistic protection, sensors), intelligence (Who is a threat? Where is the threat? What is the intent?) and legal constraints.
The legal analysis is critical, but necesary. Your assessment must include "Would it be legal to take [whatever action you're considering]?"
Legal justification will require that you can demonstrate:
In other words, you or a defenseless person were subject to an immediate threat in a way that placed your life in jeopardy, and there will be a reasonableness test applied.
That is, would a reasonable person come to the same conclusion as you did in the situation, given what you knew at that time?
You are walking down a city street, notice a man with a knife or gun acting strange one block away. In the eyes of the law the reasonable act would be to stop, not approach the man, and summon law enforcement. You should be in condition red, but if the situation changes: the man approaches you, aims the firearm at you -- either of these would place you in immediate jeopardy.
Decide: The decide step is thought (action comes next). We've all had the experience where time seems to slow during a crash or a game or a fall. The 'slowing" is the brain rapidly processing huge amounts of information. Therefore it's very important to practice the decision process so you can use that time to make a quick decision.
We've all had moments where we just "froze," unable to act as we observed something happen. That's the natural reaction -- but we can train to not freeze.
Training means practice.
Fortunately it's easy and no one will know. You can work through scenarios anywhere: at work, at the mall, in a convenience store, in line at a grocery store, sitting in traffic, walking down a street....
You can run these mental exercises constantly, gaming out what you would or would not be able to do. But you can't stop at "I think I might..." You have to decide that you would act.
And you have to rehearse that action mentally, and eventually physically.
"OK, well then I would head butt him..."
Fine.
Have you practiced that? Wearing street clothes?
It's very important to be able to decide quickly, but then you need to act just as quickly in a way that is possible. You may have watched Bruce Lee movies but unless you've practiced 10,000 roundhouse kicks it's unlikely you're going to kick your way out of a mugging.
Act: Finally, you must act. The action may be "Here's my wallet."
But whatever you do, do it with intent.
Nothing emboldens a criminal more than weak prey. Indecision is weakness in that world and if you seem frazzled, uncertain, hesitant -- well, the wallet will probably be the first thing you lose.
If you chose to take defensive action: a punch, kick, head butt, gun draw -- do it with commitment. The deciding part is over -- it's time to do.
Few things are more disorienting to an attacker than a sudden, vicious counter-attack by a committed opponent. Thugs, punks, banger, and trash are not used to victims responding aggressively. You might shift the balance very quickly in your favor.
I grew up in a pretty nasty part of industrial corridor New Jersey. I had a friend, Glen, who was not particularly big or strong. But no one would fight him (there was a fight every day after school -- it was expected, like dinner).
A kid pushed him too far one day at a local park and I quickly learned why no one fought him.
He became enraged -- completely, totally committed to destroying his opponent. He threw punches, screamed, kicked, bit. his eyes were wild and he looked like a demented rabid badger.
That fight ended when the other kid broke free and ran for his life, screaming, "You're crazy! He's crazy!"
I learned two very important lessons that day:
Civilians are constrained by practical (available weapons, ballistic protection, sensors), intelligence (Who is a threat? Where is the threat? What is the intent?) and legal constraints.
The legal analysis is critical, but necesary. Your assessment must include "Would it be legal to take [whatever action you're considering]?"
Legal justification will require that you can demonstrate:
- Opportunity (the attacker was within range of causing harm to you or a person who was defenseless)
- Jeopardy (the attacker had to ability and intent to cause harm by wielding a "deadly weapon" or significant disparity of force)
- Ability (the act was about to happen -- there was no chance for avoidance or delay in responding).
In other words, you or a defenseless person were subject to an immediate threat in a way that placed your life in jeopardy, and there will be a reasonableness test applied.
That is, would a reasonable person come to the same conclusion as you did in the situation, given what you knew at that time?
You are walking down a city street, notice a man with a knife or gun acting strange one block away. In the eyes of the law the reasonable act would be to stop, not approach the man, and summon law enforcement. You should be in condition red, but if the situation changes: the man approaches you, aims the firearm at you -- either of these would place you in immediate jeopardy.
Decide: The decide step is thought (action comes next). We've all had the experience where time seems to slow during a crash or a game or a fall. The 'slowing" is the brain rapidly processing huge amounts of information. Therefore it's very important to practice the decision process so you can use that time to make a quick decision.
We've all had moments where we just "froze," unable to act as we observed something happen. That's the natural reaction -- but we can train to not freeze.
Training means practice.
Fortunately it's easy and no one will know. You can work through scenarios anywhere: at work, at the mall, in a convenience store, in line at a grocery store, sitting in traffic, walking down a street....
For example: You drive up to the Gas Mart at night. There are three other cars at the pumps. What type cars? Who is in them? Look around the lot as you get out -- is there anyone walking? Standing in front of the storefront? Certain you've spotted everyone in proximity you pull out your wallet to use the pump what would you do if someone came behind the pump and demanded your wallet --and he is holding a knife... or a gun...
What if a car raced into the lot and three guys wearing masks jumped out with guns and ran inside the store?
This isn't far-fetched. Here's Massad Ayoob discussing "Stop and Rob"
You can run these mental exercises constantly, gaming out what you would or would not be able to do. But you can't stop at "I think I might..." You have to decide that you would act.
And you have to rehearse that action mentally, and eventually physically.
A Note about De Escalation
A critical part of the "decide" step is to determine if the situation can be avoided by not escalating the situation from a mere encounter to a physical confrontation. De-escalation is a combination of:
So if in the example above you decided you would "Draw my pistol from concealment and shoot him twice in the chest" can you draw your pistol and put two shots on target in less than a second? If he's at arms length holding a pistol on you it's likely he can squeeze a trigger before you draw.
- Posture: Defensive, but not aggressive.
- Verbal: Establish boundaries: "Don't come any closer."
- Position: Establish Distance -- keep space between you and aggressor
"OK, well then I would head butt him..."
Fine.
Have you practiced that? Wearing street clothes?
It's very important to be able to decide quickly, but then you need to act just as quickly in a way that is possible. You may have watched Bruce Lee movies but unless you've practiced 10,000 roundhouse kicks it's unlikely you're going to kick your way out of a mugging.
 |
| Billy Jack can. Can you? |
But whatever you do, do it with intent.
Nothing emboldens a criminal more than weak prey. Indecision is weakness in that world and if you seem frazzled, uncertain, hesitant -- well, the wallet will probably be the first thing you lose.
If you chose to take defensive action: a punch, kick, head butt, gun draw -- do it with commitment. The deciding part is over -- it's time to do.
Few things are more disorienting to an attacker than a sudden, vicious counter-attack by a committed opponent. Thugs, punks, banger, and trash are not used to victims responding aggressively. You might shift the balance very quickly in your favor.
I grew up in a pretty nasty part of industrial corridor New Jersey. I had a friend, Glen, who was not particularly big or strong. But no one would fight him (there was a fight every day after school -- it was expected, like dinner).
A kid pushed him too far one day at a local park and I quickly learned why no one fought him.
He became enraged -- completely, totally committed to destroying his opponent. He threw punches, screamed, kicked, bit. his eyes were wild and he looked like a demented rabid badger.
That fight ended when the other kid broke free and ran for his life, screaming, "You're crazy! He's crazy!"
I learned two very important lessons that day:
- Don't make Glen mad.
- Crazy can be very effective.
Secure: It's not over until the scene is secure.
If you have used deadly force, immediately call (or have someone else call) 911.
Tell the 911 operator you were attacked, you defended yourself, your location, and your description,
Then hang up.
There is NO BENEFIT to staying on the line with 911 (ask George Zimmerman).
Maintain vigilance as you wait OR move to a safe space and await law enforcement. Your job is done when the attack is ended. You're not justified in chasing down suspects or meting out justice.
Observe, Assess, Decide, Act -- practice it daily and you will be better prepared if evil comes your way.
Here's a good discussion of "What to do after a self-defense event:"
Then hang up.
There is NO BENEFIT to staying on the line with 911 (ask George Zimmerman).
Maintain vigilance as you wait OR move to a safe space and await law enforcement. Your job is done when the attack is ended. You're not justified in chasing down suspects or meting out justice.
Observe, Assess, Decide, Act -- practice it daily and you will be better prepared if evil comes your way.
Here's a good discussion of "What to do after a self-defense event:"
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment! I appreciate your comments and will review and post if appropriate.
thanks again!