Carry a Sharp Stick but Then Speak Softly

This Ain't Hell links to a heartwarming tale of a Texas homeowner who defended his (small) home with a spear. Probably took the Havamal literally: "Unsure is the knowing when need shall arise / Of a spear on the way without." Or within, either. But he should've paid attention to another part: "The hasty tongue sings its own mishap / If it be not bridled in."

In the TV interview he handled himself well but admitted that the intruder appeared to be unarmed. Now I'm convinced he was still in the right -- just looking at the invader's size, I'd say the homeowner was properly in fear of life and limb; and he stopped stabbing when the intruder retreated, which looks good on him (it shows he was after "defense" and not "revenge"). But intimate facts like that don't need to be spoken out in the open air which is full of police and prosecutors too. If someone wants to make an issue out of it (and in some places, the difference in races alone would make that likely), better to make the prosecution prove what did or didn't appear, rather than to offer it as a gift to the public.

I wouldn't wish a home invasion on anyone, but if I were faced with that situation and the press came 'round for an interview, I'd take my advice from the firm of Clancy and Makem.

21 comments:

Grim said...

You can never go wrong listening to Clancy, Clancy, Clancy & Makem.

Or the Havamal.

Texan99 said...

There's a good case to be made for ensuring that you've thoroughly killed someone who attempted a home invasion, as a donation to the public peace--you don't want to hear that he survived and went on to kill the next homeowner--but for this guy's sake I'm glad he left himself room to argue that he acted purely defensively.

E Hines said...

There's a good case to be made for ensuring that you've thoroughly killed someone who attempted a home invasion...you don't want to hear that he survived and went on to kill the next homeowner....

Or to take another run at you, or to sue you for the heinous crime of defending yourself, your family, your property.

Eric Hines

Eric Blair said...

Hah! SCA. I shall have to pass this one around to some people I know.

Grim said...

Possibly it was a boar spear. I had a friend who hunted them that way, my old Jujitsu instructor (and a former Marine).

raven said...

The spearhead on a boar spear has a crossguard or a hole to insert a guard- so the enraged boar does not run up the spearshaft, further impaling itself in an attempt to gore the hunter. A very dangerous sport, boarhunting.

Grim said...

That was why he did it.

Ymar Sakar said...

I don't use spears. People can cut themselves on that.

Ymar Sakar said...

Why are people going all medieval and dark ages now a days?

It's like they think the Apoc is coming or something.

Grim said...

I object to the conflation of "Medieval" and "Dark." The Medieval period was especially bright and beautiful, viewed with the right eyes. Look at the illuminations; the Cathedrals; cloth-of-gold and the white cloaks of Templars crossed only with honest red.

Ymar Sakar said...

The Dark Ages were what the people themselves felt, although not necessarily called, because upon looking at the Ancient power of the Romans, their civilization was not as bright as they knew it could be.

But is a description what you really take to be important, Grim?

I'm not sure what you mean by conflation, since while I mentioned the two of them side by side, that doesn't mean I claimed they were equal to each other. Which intellectuals and Leftists academics have you been listening to and complaining about, that have? Usually goes back to that point sooner or later.

Ymar Sakar said...

My advisers and trainers told me to say only the minimum possible to the police, due to the whole inconsistency, lying, and gotcha prosecution power play that can result.

I was in fear of my life.

It was dark, I feared there were more people.

I was afraid they would try to burn down my home, so I tried to find an escape method, and the assailant just happened to be between me and escape.

Self defense is essentially something the police take to mean "I did something of a crime, like homicide, but I have reasons to justify it". They will then try to look for your reasons to see if it is really justified by the evidence.

So instead of claiming self defense, claim your justifications first and make it consistent. Doesn't have to make sense, it just has to be consistent.

And please, stop waving a sword around on public tv. It makes the rest of us more of a target for Democrat prosecutors looking for their pound of meat. They already eviscerated the Tea Party.

Yu-Ain Gonnano said...

The Dark Ages were what the people themselves felt.

Actually, no. The Dark Ages didn't exist. Science continued to progress, living standards continued to improve, European slavery was abolilshed. Humanity continued to progress. Standardized handwriting came about during this time (Capitalization, spelling, punctuation were haphazard andspacesbetweenwordsdidnotexistpriortoit) greatly expanding literacy.

The term originated with an Italian writer pining for the Roman Empire and Italian ascendency. It would be like a Neo Confederate pining for the early 17th century (but conveniently leaving out that whole slavery thing) and bad mouthing the modern world (and again conveniently leaving out modern conveniences) all because he thinks modern day society is tacky and gaudy and should get off his lawn.

Yes, there was no big giant superpower building big giant roads to transport big giant armies to enrich the elite, but daily life for the peasants pretty much went on as it had.

Grim said...

It would be like a Neo Confederate pining for the early 17th century...

It's true that the whole of the 17th century is an odd time for nostalgia. A lot of important things happened, but for the most part I'm glad to have missed it.

Might have been fun in the Caribbean, I suppose. Sail with Henry Morgan, that sort of thing. But for the most part, it was one of the less pleasant centuries in which to live -- even if you were inclined to ignore the slavery, which of course you never should.

Yu-Ain Gonnano said...

It's true that the whole of the 17th century is an odd time for nostalgia. A lot of important things happened, but for the most part I'm glad to have missed it.

Which is a pretty good description of the Western Roman Empire, too. There is a lot of romanticization of the period that it really doesn't warrant.

Grim said...

Yeah, the Roman Empire has always been high on my list of places to which I cannot relate. China, too, through most of its history. Although it was a very interesting place to live for a while. The experience was enlightening, especially on just how very much it is possible for a human civilization to violate the standards of morality you would have assumed were human nature.

Anonymous said...

I've spent a large swath of the last year (mentally) in the 17th Century. No thank you. Far too many interesting things happened in that 100 year span for me to have any nostalgia for it. It was not a happy time for pretty much anyone living in the northern hemisphere, and from what few records and archaeological records that we have, not splendid in the southern hemisphere, either.

LittleRed1

Ymar Sakar said...

The Dark Ages didn't exist. Science continued to progress, living standards continued to improve,

The Dark Age or a dark age is what happens when an entire civilization falls off the grid. It's not what you academics think happened because of some made up scientific study on history and primitive societies.

Ymar Sakar said...

The term originated with an Italian writer pining for the Roman Empire and Italian ascendency.

So when you use the term, I now understand that you mean some dead ignorant academic's use is the way you use it.

The way I use the term is the way Ymar uses the term, and I'm still alive. I'm going to use the term the way I want to use the term, since I don't recognize dead people's patents that weren't even patented to begin with.

As with racism, if you don't want to see it, stop bringing it up. Regardless, you're not going to make me accept your definition of things. You ain't gonna do it and neither can Grim over there, who can object all he wants to dead people's history.

Yu-Ain Gonnano said...

you're not going to make me accept your definition of things

I'm not sure how I could possible have the power to make you do anything. Even if I desired such a thing.

You can call a dog a kangaroo and I can't do anything about it other than to point it out.

You're free to continue calling a dog a kangaroo to your heart's content.

Doesn't make it a kangaroo though.

Yu-Ain Gonnano said...

The Dark Age or a dark age is what happens when an entire civilization falls off the grid.

Specifically, even under this definition, it still doesn't qualify. It would be like Canada invading DC and sacking the city. Sure the Federal gov't would dissolve, but the state and local gov'ts would still exist. Yes, that transition wouldn't be pleasant. But it wouldn't be societal collapse. There wouldn't be mass murder and pillaging. There would be no mass starvation and medical care wouldn't fall back 200 years and wallow there for centuries. It would be a brief hiccup that likely wouldn't even be noticed 50 years later.

The same was true of the Roman Empire.

It's only because of the whining of some "ignorant academic", as you put it, that anyone thought the fall of Rome was some big backwards step for civilization.