Too Hot To Handle
We’re all in a tough spot, don’t make it harder on yourself.
It’s been months since I last wrote a preparedness-focused essay. For any new readers out there, prepping is what I enjoy talking about the most. It may not be as titillating as discussing civil wars, revolutions, or current events, but nothing, and I mean nothing, is more important than what goes on in your personal lives. This blog has always been about the practical things in this world; I only talk about current events or politics with respect to how it affects us on a daily basis.
Talking about prepping is where I feel like I’m actually providing useful information instead of yelling into the void, wallowing in misery. There’s just not much use in talking about all this unless I can apply it to our day-to-day existence and provide realistic solutions for dealing with it. Plus, writing about prepping is far less exhausting mentally, though it still involves plenty of critical thinking.
More important, I’ve always said that as the American internal conflict intensifies, the most any of us will see it manifest is in our interactions with others in our personal lives. Most of the time, there will be nothing overtly political about it. Conflict may even arise between those belonging to the same faction. It’s what happens in a diverse, low-trust society riven by a fiercely hostile political divide that has everyone constantly on edge, eyeing each other suspiciously. You won’t even be conscious about it, because it’ll become such a normal part of life.
I gained a lot of new readers in the last week, for which I’m truly grateful. I hope you all enjoy this departure from dramatic events of our moment so we can focus on more mundane matters. If you don’t, just sit tight - we’ll be talking about the cool stuff again soon.
Lethal Insecurity
Last month, a security guard in Oregon was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison after an escalating series of public confrontations led to a final explosive encounter.
Here’s KGW8 reporting the news:
PORTLAND, Ore. — A Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge has sentenced a private security guard who was convicted of murdering a man in a Lowe's parking lot in 2021.
Logan Conrad Gimbel was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 25 years, the Multnomah County District Attorney's Office announced on Tuesday.
Earlier this month, a jury found Gimbel guilty of second-degree murder in the fatal shooting of Freddy Nelson while he was sitting in his truck at a Lowe's parking lot near Delta Park in North Portland in May 2021. Nelson was 49 years old at the time. Gimbel was also found guilty of unlawful use of a weapon and second-degree unlawful use of mace. The jury found Gimbel not guilty of recklessly endangering another person.
The YouTube account “EWU Bodycam” recently provided an in-depth overview of the incident. However, the video was removed due to a copyright claim by Cornerstone Security Group, Logan Gimbel’s former employer. It’s unfortunate it was taken down, because it was the most complete account and analysis of the incident, and included bodycam footage of prior interactions leading up to the final, fatal encounter.
Here’s the bodycam footage of the moment Gimbel killed Freddy Nelson [WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT]:
It’s pretty shocking and totally unnecessary. It’s a perfect example of how the most violence any of us will be subjected to involves overheated emotions or the inability to resolve a simple dispute. Yes, personalities matter - Logan Gimbel clearly had issues which exacerbated conflict - but what happened here is different from what we think we’re more at risk of, which is criminal violence. Yes, Gimbel committed a crime, but he did so under what he thought were legal pretenses. It’s also a perfect example of how quickly any interaction can violently deteriorate - from the moment when Gimbel confronted Freddy Nelson to when he shot him, only a minute and ten seconds had elapsed. Imagine if you knew, upon parking your car, you’d die within 70 seconds of doing so. Would you still want to do so?
Had even just one party, victim included, kept a cool head, nobody would’ve died. I know some might read that as victim-blaming, but when you have two parties fueled by anger, only a bad outcome can result, unless some outside force intervenes. That said, there’s no doubt, in the end, it was Gimbel who was most at fault. I wish they hadn’t taken down the EWU Bodycam video, because you see how this conflict between him and Nelson initially began, and how Gimbel unnecessarily escalated the situation during earlier interactions, using his position as a security guard to bully and intimidate Nelson. Then you have Gimbel spraying OC into Nelson’s vehicle simply for refusing to leave (note that Gimbel’s patrol car had Nelson blocked in). If the intent was to force him to leave, I don’t understand how spraying and blinding him was supposed to accomplish that.
If I recall correctly from the EWU Bodycam video, Nelson was formally trespassed by the property owner, but also had an informal agreement with a manager at the Lowe’s he was killed in front of to go about his business. It seems as though a lack of clarity over whether Nelson was actually trespassing had something to do with how things ended up, but I also don’t think it matters much with respect to what happened when the shooting occurred.
I can understand why Nelson reached his breaking point and decided to frighten Gimbel right back by abruptly moving his vehicle towards him, imprudent as it may have been. After all, how else do you do deal with a tormentor? You either avoid them, suck up the abuse, or fire a shot across the bow. It was Nelson, not Gimbel, who had a right to feel threatened at that point, given their history. At no point in any prior interaction did Nelson harass or threaten Gimbel. What happened the day he died was as belligerent Nelson had been throughout the whole affair.
What are we as preppers to learn from this, beyond keeping a cool head? How do you even keep a cool head in a situation like this? The fact that one of the involved parties was a security guard complicates matters tremendously, as private security exists within a legal gray area that I feel the system does a poor job of establishing clear guidelines. On one hand, security guards do exercise some level of legal authority as long as they’re properly licensed and contracted by a client to lawfully exercise violence within a limited scope.
On the other hand, they’re not sworn law enforcement officers, entitled to about as much authority to impose order as you and I have. In practical terms, a security guard has only as much authority as their employer is willing to pay for, literally. Some private security firms have insurance policies worth millions of dollars intended to cover damages resulting from routine work, while other security firms barely provide coverage, expecting their security guards to act as little more than eyes and ears, while still expecting them to potentially end up in harm’s way.
There’s a lot of advice out there for security guards regarding their on-the-job conduct. Here’s an article discussing how to deal with a trespasser; compare Logan Gimbel’s conduct to the best practices recommended here [bold mine]:
First Response
When dealing with a trespasser, a well-trained security officer will not overreact. Instead, the wiser course of action would be to first attempt reasoning with the trespasser politely. Usually you can determine whether the individual’s intentions are harmful by simply asking what they are doing on the premises. This can help the security officer ascertain the situation and better understand how to proceed with the trespasser in question. Following that, a simple and polite request that he or she leave the premises is often sufficient.
If possible, an officer should perform this questioning in private so as to avoid any potential invasion of privacy or defamation actions. Also of great importance is that the security officer maintain a respectable distance between the trespasser so that the individual does not feel threatened or cornered.
How to Escort the Trespasser Off the Premises
It is essential that a security officer escort the trespasser the entire way off the premises. Staying too far away can make the trespasser feel more unsupervised and less likely to listen to the request to leave. Also, always attempt to evict with a witness or a partner! In most cities, a trespass warning must first be provided in the presence of law enforcement. Once an official trespass warning has been provided to an individual, if that individual commits a second trespass violation they can then be arrested by the police.
If the trespasser seems violent or is uncooperative, it is also necessary to obtain police assistance. When calling, make sure to inform the police of the situation that they are responding to. If the trespasser has been violent or unstable, these pertinent details and others like them should be reported to the police as well. This process is of utmost importance because assisting the police is essential in the relationship between private security and police.
Obviously, things aren’t always that simple. Some people just can’t be reasoned with and will be uncooperative. In such a situation, use of force may be warranted, but use of force by a security guard is, ultimately, little different from a citizen’s use of force. Citizens using violence is a risky bet. Absent a crime presenting a clear and present danger to life, it isn’t worth the trouble exposing oneself to such risks. The line between a legal use of force and an illegal one is so blurry, it’s not something even most security guards can navigate.
If it’s decided that using force is necessary, it must be understood they may have to go all the way in doing so, especially when dealing with a truly threatening individual. If an arrest becomes too dangerous to affect and the problematic person tries getting away, it may be better to just let them escape, unfortunate as it may be. As Gimbel later told investigators, ironically, it’s not worth losing your freedom or life over a low-wage job like security.
What about when dealing with a problematic security guard? There’s not as much advice about that out there. It’s a special type of challenge handling someone attempting to wield authority over you because the rules of the game say they have to win. If you’re actually breaking the law, then fighting a security guard will likely make things worse for you. If they’re the ones crossing the line, like Logan Gimbel was, you need to keep a cool head and not do anything to worsen the situation. Remember that even the worst security guard simply believes they’re just doing their job - as long as they believe this, no amount of arguing or fighting is going to change their mind.
The lesson: treat a security guard like any other worker. Yes, security guards are more willing to use force than most workers and are often armed. This actually simplifies things: it should make anyone think twice about allowing a situation to spiral out of control when dealing with a security guard. If you think giving a waiter a tough time is conduct unbecoming, then giving a security guard can be downright dangerous. Don’t mess with people who are able and willing to use violence against you in the course of their occupational duties. It doesn’t make it okay for them to abuse their power, but it still doesn’t make it a good idea to fight them, either. If you wouldn’t fight an armed criminal, why would you fight an armed security guard? It says something about the assumptions we make of others, doesn’t it?
In the end, Nelson’s death was totally unnecessary and Gimbel deservedly went to prison for it. Yet one can’t help but think - had Nelson not maneuvered his vehicle towards Gimbel, wouldn’t he still be alive? The ex-security guard may have been looking for a reason to kill Nelson and kept pushing and pushing until he got one. But that’s still not the same as a true criminal who’s going to kill you just for standing in the way. Either way, provoking an armed and dangerous individual under any circumstance is a bad idea. Nelson shouldn’t have threatened Gimbel with his vehicle and, if he couldn’t drive off, should’ve escaped on foot with his wife when they had the chance, getting as far away from Gimbel as possible. There was nothing to gain from sticking around and trying to argue or fight your way out of a confrontation. It’s not going to end well for both parties.
Dr. Todd Grande, a psychologist with a popular YouTube channel, released his own video analyzing the case. Grande reveals some more details about it I haven’t seen elsewhere, including a closer look at Nelson’s background. It casts him in a less sympathetic light and Grande himself believes Gimbel was served a miscarriage of justice - he thinks manslaughter was the more appropriate charge.
Watch Grande explain - he makes a good case for it:
Whatever your conclusions, I’d hope we’d all agree that Gimbel deserved to go to prison and that nobody should’ve died. I’d also hope we all see the need to learn how to deal effectively with security guards. You’re going to be seeing a lot more of them in the years to come, as America becomes a more insecure society.
Get A Dashcam
Why? Here’s why:
Here’s another example:
You may have seen other videos of predominantly Black males (yes, I notice the obvious) on bicycles doing wheelies through traffic or in close proximity to other vehicles and people, playing a dangerous game of chicken. Obviously, they’re not trying to make friends here. They’re trying to provoke and have fun at everyone else’s expense, daring them to react. Most people won’t and the law says you can’t, so they get to do whatever they want. You’re not even allowed to notice, either, unless it’s to compliment them on their skill.
But what if something like that happens to you? Then you can’t ignore it. You have to deal with it. I hope you bought that dash camera! In the year 2024 and onward, nothing less than a video recording will suffice as a reliable account of your version of events. We are long past the point where your word alone is considered credible evidence. I’m not going to get into technical details of dashcams - that’ll be for a later post - but having a reliable model capable of recording at high resolution can be the difference between vindication and a world of trouble.
If you do find yourself in a collision with a joyriding cyclist, stop. However, don’t get out of the vehicle, not right away. Watch and observe the situation from a safe distance. None of us want to hit and run, but remember: if they hit you, you’re the victim, not them. Call 911 and explain the situation, request police presence, and whether the cyclist appears injured or not, an ambulance. At the very least, nobody can accuse you of not caring enough about the individual who rode their bike into you.
Afterwards, continue to observe from a safe distance. If it seems safe enough to get out and approach the person who ran into you, do so, check and see if they’re fine. I can’t stress enough, however: trust your gut. If you don’t feel comfortable getting out of the vehicle and approaching the other party, don’t. Sit tight and wait for first responders to arrive.
If the other party comes after you, acting in a threatening manner, you may have no choice but to withdraw, at the risk of being falsely accused of hitting and running. If escape isn’t possible or you don’t feel comfortable doing that either, then stay inside your vehicle and lock your doors. This is especially true if you have family with you. Hopefully, authorities get there in time. Make sure your dashcam is running and have your phone out recording events. Another reason to not get out of your vehicle is to protect your evidence. Whatever the case may be, never compromise your safety out of a sense of guilt or social responsibility. Thousands of people, most of whom weren’t even present, are going to judge you anyway, but you cannot let fear of judgment influence you to drift into danger
Remember: if you get out of the car, not only are you unprotected, you’re fighting on the joyrider’s turf. Anarcho-tyranny has created a world where joyriders like the ones seen in the incidents above feel empowered to behave in any way they desire. Never, under any circumstances, confront them. You won’t win - they’re willing to bring more to the fight than you are and society has already decided you’re the aggressor anyway, no matter what they did. Worse, they may even kill you for having the temerity to stand up to them. This is their world, we’re just living in it.
On the matter of dashcams, here’s a good debate concerning the legal considerations involved in having one:
Some interesting points to chew on. I found it interesting one of the lawyers said they wouldn’t recommend buying one since it can hurt you as much as it can help you. Remember: the camera can help you only if it captures sane, sober, moral, prudent (to quote Active Self-Protection’s John Correia), and lawful behavior on your part. That said, I still think it’s better to have one than not, coupled with a clear understanding it’s purpose is to corroborate your side of the story, not necessarily to catch someone in the act. There can certainly be overlap, but they’re not the same thing, either.
Whatever you decide on dashcams, the most important decision you’ll make is the one that gets you away from danger, not closer to it. It’s going to get harder to avoid danger in the years to come, but we all need to believe it’s still possible. What’s the alternative?
“I No Longer Want To Live Here”
Consider this a segue to my next piece. A troubling incident out of Staten Island, New York shows you really can’t be too careful anymore when stepping outside.
A 62-year-old Staten Island resident declared he wants to move after he was brutally attacked by a mob of teenagers during his daily evening stroll last month, according to reports.
The man was walking near the intersection of Howard Avenue and Clove Road in the Sunnyside neighborhood just after 7 p.m. July 15 when the group of delinquents began to harass him.
Streetside surveillance cameras captured the moment when nine juveniles followed the man down the road, according to video obtained by silive.com.
One of the delinquents rushed up behind the man, who jumped into the middle of a busy street to avoid the bunch as the rest of the group chased him across the road.“He raised his fists and said, ‘Pick one’ and I said, ‘Not interested,'” the man told NBC New York. “I thought it was just a kid joking around.
“I don’t know, maybe that set them off or something, I don’t know, but they were looking for trouble,” he added.
The man said the laughing group didn’t try to rob him or make any remarks.
Several punches were thrown at the man as he ran off camera as the assault continued. He was left with bruises on his knee and stitches in his finger.
And:
The attack has left the man afraid to go outside — and even wanting to move.
“I wanna leave here, I no longer want to live here,” he said.
I was under the impression this entire time that Staten Island was one of the safest parts of New York City. If this isn’t the case, I’d like to be corrected. But wherever you reside, now, more than ever, it’s important to begin practicing better situational awareness and other vital personal safety skills. It’s not that something like this could happen to you tomorrow. The issue is that if it does, it’s probably too late to do anything about it. Living your life based on statistical likelihoods is no way to live. After all, what all emergencies have in common is that they don’t happen often. If they did, it says more about your lifestyle than it does about the world.
Still, America is a place where people have taken safety in public for granted. Part of the reason is because, for the most part, nothing happens to us when we go outside. This isn’t the same as living in a safe society, but we’re not Brazil, either. Yet I’m sure Brazilians, not all of them, anyway, are fighting their way home every single day. My point is simply that safety is never a given and that the number of truly safe places in this country is dwindling. This is going to become more so as America gets more crowded. The reality is that the worst of us not only want to live in nice places also, they think they’re entitled to it. What happened in Staten Island is an example of something likely to become more prevalent in previously tranquil places, depending on the demographic situation of the area.
The increasing lack of escape is a major aspect of America’s destabilization. Being able to get away from crime and dysfunction - what left-wing scholars derisively call “White flight” - was so vital to keeping a lid on social tensions. It’s a luxury our European neighbors, Britain especially, don’t have the benefit of, due to their much smaller size. Even leisure activities like cruises have become dangerous, due to the number of fights breaking out on them. What can we do and where can we now go to get away from it all to live in peace and order?
As I explained regarding the Costco model, peaceful, orderly living may become something with a high price tag attached. Here’s the thing: under the regime of anarcho-tyranny, we may get to a point where it doesn’t matter if you paid. If they decide you must share your spaces with others, the Regime will find an excuse to force you to do so. What then? Where will you go? Will there be anywhere left to run to?
These are questions we all need to begin asking ourselves.
Notice. It’s A Survival Technique
One more thing before opening it up for discussion. If you ever find yourself in a situation like this unfortunate food vendor here, please don’t do what he did when asked by the 911 dispatcher to describe his harasser:
When pressed, he does tell the dispatcher the man is Black. He also describes the harasser to 911 as a “nice guy” multiple times. Really? Why call 911, then? Sure seems like the situation is manageable! Clearly, he called 911 because he felt threatened. Certainly, you don’t want to lie to the dispatcher or blow things out of proportion, but if you’re going to call 911, you have to convince them there’s a genuine problem that needs to be addressed immediately. As for being apprehensive about telling the dispatcher the man’s race, he may have sincerely not understood the question, but he seemed to understand most everything else he was asked. Especially in the context of everything which has happened the last four years, suspicion is warranted.
All I can say is, notice. Noticing keeps you out of danger. Noticing helps others, like the police, help you. Noticing helps keep others away from danger. I know there’s a strong social taboo against it, but when it’s your safety at stake, it’s all you’ve got. We’re all in a tough spot, don’t make it harder on yourself. You’re not the one looking for trouble, after all. All you’re doing is reporting what’s obvious to all. At the least, don’t lie to yourself about what you saw. You’re only hurting yourself.
Over to you - what’s your reaction to the killing of Freddy Nelson by Logan Gimbel? Do you see any way death could’ve been avoided? What’s your opinion on dashcams and dealing with dangerous joyriders? What are your thoughts on anything else we covered here?
Chat it up in the comments.
Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.
If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!
Recently, I went to Seattle for the weekend. It was really just a stop on the way further north out into the Skagit Valley, but the morning we were there we went walking around downtown. In broad daylight, it's not explicitly dangerous, but you still see a myriad of sketchy characters best avoided, and I always have my head on a swivel and I scrutinize just about everyone I see that even looks slightly questionable. When our group was stopped at a crosswalk, I noticed the visibly indigent man in front of me lean down. It looked like he was tying his shoes , but he was fussing with something in his hand. What it was, I can't say, but what I saw for certain was that he had multiple syringes bounds to his wrist with blue medical gauze. They were all capped, but it made me realize how easy it would be to bump into someone with an uncapped syringe, if they were just wandering around with one out, or even how easy it would be for some deranged individual to prick an unsuspecting bypasser with one if they weren't looking out for, well, visibly deranged people. I made everyone cross the street to get away from him and when I told them why, everyone asked "How did you even notice that?" Well, like you said - noticing. "Don't make it harder on yourself" are some good words to live by, so, with that in mind, I won't be returning to Seattle again in the near future.
More on topic, as standards in America become increasingly third world, I think dashcams will become a necessity. There's a reason that dashcam footage from Russia is so ubiquitous, and it's mostly because car insurance fraud is so rampant and commonplace that, if you can't prove that an accident wasn't your fault, you're screwed. Anecdotally speaking, I know a lot of people who have been in accidents with uninsured, most likely illegal drivers in Texas, and every time it happens the perpetrator always either A) runs or B) tries to harangue the victim into not calling the cops. A friend of mine intervened in one accident where an illegal alien was threatening a woman he had rear-ended. My friend had originally stopped to help because he's car savvy and had the tools in his truck to help get the struck cars running again, if need be, but the perpetrator threatened him, too. He did call the cops and the guys left before the police got to the scene. In a low trust society you'll always need to C.Y.A. in any way possible, so, depending on where you live, I'd say a dash cam would not be a bad investment.
I always look forward to your well written and insightful essays. The video of that older man being set upon by that group of “teens” triggered a memory of a similar event in my own life I’ve mentioned before that didn’t turn to violence. We must be resolute and not let any social considerations interfere with our gut instinct to survive. Never should it pass through our mind of “well, I have to be understanding” or “I shouldn’t assume this group means me harm because that would stereotypical.” Our instinct can read people of all stripes in a moment and perceive signs of threats we can’t even articulate.
I brought up my own incident of a group of would be attackers with a colleague who is from a rough background. When he heard it was a group of teens, he said that means they’re actually not too tough. When they have to roll in a click, that tells you they’re not individually “bold.” Tell one of them directly you’ll mess them up and it’ll spook them. Ask one why the hell are you in my zone and he will likely back off. He said the ones you have to worry more about are the lone cats who absolutely do not give two thoughts about walking out on their own and knifing/shooting you over disrespect. He talked of “young heads” who would go to relatively safe neighborhoods to threaten and act tough as they know nobody will really “step to them.” Then they try to go to tougher spots. It’s like an entry level job for the would be hoodlum. Any of us in nicer areas need to be ready for them and give them the right attitude commiserate with their actions or a tough look that reminds them not to mess with locals.