Posts

Everyday Carry in light of School Shootings

I recently wrote about retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel David Grossman, who coined the term “sheepdog” to refer to those who, by virtue of their profession or their values, had a capacity for violence and a willingness to stand up for the innocent against those who have a capacity for violence but lack empathy for their fellow humans. The same day that I wrote about Grossman, a white supremacist plowed his car into a group of protesters, killing one and injuring 19. After the attack of this white supremacist, I thought about taking down my post, worried that it would be misinterpreted as heartless or worse. Instead, I decided to talk about something Grossman does not talk about in his book On Combat at length, which is the duty of “sheepdogs” to be ready to save others, not just through the use of violence, but also through the use of lifesaving skills and equipment.

In 2011, in another act of violence, the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, sheriff’s deputies saved her life through the use of a low-cost first aid kit based on a piece of equipment well-known to veterans of the US Armed Forces: the IFAK. The IFAK – or Individual First Aid Kit – was issued to service members like me throughout the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and serves as a response to the leading causes of combat fatalities in those two engagements. Inside this softball-sized nylon pouch, soldiers kept a small collection of first aid items. In the IFAK, one can find[1]:

  • a nylon pouch ($11.99)
  • a tourniquet ($9.59)
  • a roll of medical tape ($3.49)
  • disposable gloves (100/$10.99)
  • a nasopharyngeal airway tube (used when injury limits someone’s ability to breathe) ($5.30)
  • an Israeli Bandage ($7.97), and/or
  • a Quick Clotting or Hemostatic Bandage ($12.16)[2].

everyday carry first aid edc

The total cost of the IFAK pouch and its contents (even with having to purchase the gloves in bulk)?

$61.49

Now, this amount could change as one customizes it, adding and removing useful items based on one’s training, comfort level, and personal preference, but basically speaking, I am talking about having a pouch full of equipment that can save a human life for less than $100.00.

The American Red Cross[3] offers basic first aid training, including CPR use and AED use over the course of a six-hour training block at a rate of approximately $110.00. Depending on the nature of this training, it would not take more than two hours additional time to add in training on the proper use of a tourniquet, nasopharyngeal airway tube, Israeli bandage, and hemostatic bandage.

This means that, for roughly $175.00, any American could be trained on and provided with the contents of an IFAK, and be able to prevent some of the most common forms of death:

  • obstructed airways,
  • external bleeding, and,
  • cardiac arrest.

Typically, after violent incidents, such as the one in Charlottesville or the shooting of Giffords, there is a great deal of discussion about whether we have a duty to ban weapons that cause grievous injury. The debate is polarizing, unsettled, and seems to accomplish little. Never is there debate over the affirmative duty to learn how to help heal others after these incidents. Ironically, this training applies to far more than increasingly rare violent crimes, as it covers accidental death and death due to illness.

At the same time, right now there is a trend for people to carry what is known as EDC or Everyday Carry items, typically involving a well-designed pocket knife, a flashlight, and one or two other items, sometimes a multitool, sometimes a firearm (in the case of concealed carry permit holders), and sometimes other gadgets. The EDC trend seems to be an offshoot of the Sheepdog movement that has grown since 9/11 and LTC Grossman’s essay.

I have never seen people choosing to carry first aid gear on the popular websites and forums concerning Everyday Carry. And yet, for such a low individual cost – less than $200 – an individual could be trained in the steps required to save lives from some of the most common causes in fatalities. This is a decidedly unpolitical failing on the part of people on all sides of the debates concerning gun control, violence, and policing. There is no reason a person, heartily in favor of expressing their Second Amendment rights, should not be capable of and ready to save a life, whether it be due to a violent act or due to accidental injury. There is no reason a person heartily in favor of banning all firearms should not be equally as trained and equipped to save a life.

In the case of people that are EDC aficionados, it seems like such a such a basic thing, adding just this small component of knowledge and equipment to their list of what they carry everyday. For those that adopt the mentality of being a “sheepdog,” it seems almost like a moral failing, to be ready to defend others with violence but not to be ready to save others.

[1] Often, in the military, the IFAK would also contain equipment to treat tension pneumothorax, AKA a collapsed lung.

[2] The prices listed are examples; I can provide specific links if requested, but did not want to cheapen my argument with affiliate links.

[3] For better or worse the American Red Cross is the leading provider of first aid training in the USA.

SaveSave

SaveSave

LTC Dave Grossman, The First Sheepdog

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen_ a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath–a wo.png

 

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen: a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath–a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? Then you are a sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero’s path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.

LTC Dave Grossman, US Army (Ret.), in the essay “Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs,” from the book On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace (2004).

 

In any discussion of everyday carry, of being prepared for contingencies (actual contingencies, not the doomsday fantasies of survivalists), and law enforcement, David Grossman casts a long shadow. Grossman, a retired US Army Ranger, professor at the United States Military Academy (West Point), and psychologist, first coined this analogy in his 2004 book On Combat. (As an aside, On Combat and its predecessor, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society are brilliant books, and worth reading.) This article talks about how Grossman came up with his theory of what I will call the sheepdog mindset.

Grossman’s work in On Killing and On Combat came as a reaction to the work of Brigadier General S.L.A. “Slam” Marshall, who claimed to have studied the ratio of fire of combat soldiers in a work entitled Men Against Fire (Marshall’s truthfulness in this study and others has been questioned by many historians and combat veterans, including journalist and retired Colonel David Hackworth, who said Marshall “never let the truth get in the way of a good story”). Marshall asserted that 75% of combat soldiers failed to shoot at the enemy while taking fire.

Later historians debunked Marshall’s claim (PDF), arguing that he never did the underlying research he claimed to have done. Grossman did not address the allegation but instead looked at what was the sort of mental preparation required to get a soldier, Marine, law enforcement officer, or citizen to defend the lives of others in a crisis.

Grossman’s work has been remarkably influential. The film American Sniper references Grossman’s sheepdog essay, as does the popular blog The Art of Manliness. In perhaps a sea change of popular opinion since the police shootings in Ferguson and elsewhere, Grossman’s work has come under fire and been impliedly accused of supporting racism.

osman-rana-193633.jpg

Interested in learning more about EDC, outdoor and tactical products, and the outdoor industry?

 

Regardless of the logic of attacking Grossman for actions he had no control over, his essay in On Combat represented a change in how many first responders and civilians thought. Grossman’s essay about sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs started a discussion about tactical equipment, about what it meant to get ready for the day, and the danger of complacency (which Grossman describes as denial).

Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: You didn’t bring your gun; you didn’t train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by fear, helplessness, horror and shame at your moment of truth.

Grossman, Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs

Too often people engage in “all or nothing” thinking about public figures and argue that, because someone’s legacy is tied up in bad actors or bad actions, then all of that person’s efforts are invalid. Grossman opened the door to the discussion of what does it mean to be ready for an emergency. For those with the training, either as first responders, service members, trained and motivated civilians, or veterans, Grossman was creating a call to action to be ready to do good, in both mindset and equipment.