Holding Space: Notes on Self and Community Defense
Assumptions, Limitations, and What This Is Not
Firearms—especially in civilian hands—are a subject charged with tension, history, trauma, and myth. They are tools of survival, symbols of identity, flashpoints of ideology. And they do not arrive alone. They bring baggage. They bring questions. They bring consequences.
The two essays that follow—A Fighting Chance and The Second Tool—emerge from a specific question, rooted in a specific time:
What tools make sense for the average, non-prepper urban or suburban civilian in a short-term crisis where normal support systems are disrupted?
They do not pretend to be universal guides. They are contingent reflections, built around a particular lens of practicality, risk reduction, and reluctant readiness. And they are shaped by several assumptions and blind spots, which we name here—not as disavowals, but as invitations for more responsible reading.
Key Assumptions
- The Defined “Average Joe”:
These essays imagine a civilian with modest means, limited time, and no desire to play soldier. That’s a simplification. It leaves out the nuances of gender, class, race, disability, and cultural context. Real lives don’t always fit the average. - Short-Term SHTF (Shit Hits The Fan) Events:
The scenarios in mind are localized and brief—power outages, civil unrest, natural disasters. Not full societal collapse. Not “Red Dawn.” That distinction matters. - Firearms as Central Tools:
These essays focus on guns. Not because they are the most important tools—but because they are the most fraught, and often the least discussed in grounded, good-faith civilian terms. - Stable Legal Terrain (for now):
The guidance assumes today’s legal context. Laws change. Norms shift. Access varies wildly across jurisdictions. We don’t know what tomorrow allows. - Psychology Is Understated:
The essays address practicality more than psychology. But carrying a weapon—or using one—alters your mental landscape. That’s real, and not fully reckoned with here. - Community Is Underdeveloped:
The writing nods to collective defense but mostly centers family units or individual actors. Organized community defense is messy, political, and powerful—but lies beyond this scope.
Blind Spots Acknowledged
- Diversity of Experience:
Not all “average Joes” are straight, white, male, or middle-class. Their risks and options vary accordingly. These essays don’t reflect all of that. - The Aftermath:
We focus on crisis response, not aftermath care. What comes after a self-defense encounter—legally, socially, emotionally—is complex and rarely neat. - Non-Lethal and Soft Skills:
De-escalation, comms, trauma care, food security—these are as vital as any weapon. These essays don’t cover them, but they are the other side of the blade. - Historical Context:
The long and often invisible history of armed self-defense by marginalized communities—especially Black, Indigenous, queer, and working-class groups—is largely untouched here. That history matters. - Risk of Escalation:
Armed presence changes dynamics. Sometimes that deters harm. Sometimes it creates it. These essays acknowledge the risk, but don’t fully explore the spiral. - Children and Trauma:
Kids are part of the domestic sphere. Their perception of fear, conflict, and defense shapes the future. That emotional terrain deserves deeper care.
Why This Matters
None of this is an attempt to hedge.
It’s an attempt to be honest.
These essays are not blueprints. They are working notes from within the margins—pragmatic, imperfect, incomplete. What they offer is not certainty, but orientation.
Read them as you would read a topographical map drawn in fog.
Not to dictate your path.
But to remind you where the cliffs might be.