Overt vs Covert Gear in a SHTF Situation

[ST911]

Better to look like a Promise Keeper in that crowd than an Oath Keeper.

[Outlander Systems]

My quick rundown of the OK fellas:

They had their personal shit squared-away. They look like they could actually do a couple of push-ups, and weren't jocked up in a full set of multijammies. More importantly, they had the "tripod" of fundamentals in their favor:

I see the capability to shoot
I see the capability to move (they aren't a pack of fatbodies)
I see the capability to communicate

I can't stress the importance of all three, but the last two are almost universally lacking.

Tactically speaking, I have no idea if they had any overwatch. I also don't know if they had any aux support. They appear to be moping around like they're, literally, "back on the block." A video I saw showed one of the dudes, by himself, informing protestors that he "had their backs." My personal assessment is that they were extremely poorly positioned. At a minimum, I would have had a buddy system set up. That did not appear to be the case.

Now, where the rubber meets the road is whether or not Overt/Covert was a better option for this operation.

The OKs obviously had the option of projecting an image of force (which they chose). Considering their limited numbers, and no obvious support, I don't believe I would have gone this route; however, if the intent was to act as a dissuasive element towards bad actors bent on causing trouble, the Overt option may not have been a bad call. Since no one was shot on either side, perhaps the tactic was successful...

Since the media is all over the map as far as what the OK intended function was, it's difficult for me to fully assess the situation.

That being said, here is the biggest consideration for those going Overt while the lights are on:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The OK utterly failed in terms of "hearts and minds." The media has jumped on them, referring to them as everything from "heavily armed militia" to "anti-government extremists", etc. Furthermore, they made the biggest blunder possible: being lumped in with InfoWars. Congratulations, OK, you have officially been marginalized.

This could have easily been turned in favor of the OK, if, and this is extremely important, they had a support element filming, and illustrating their intent. It has been rumored, one of their goals was to inform protesters of their 2A rights; however, we are left with only the media's spin on this.

An auxiliary structure was desperately needed. The OKs actions should have been documented to counter any negative spin that would result from their operation.

So, while their primary mission, assuming it was "Peacekeeping", was a success, in that no triggers were pulled; they have lost the entire war by being crucified in the court of public opinion.

My takeway is this:

If you are going Overt, you need a support staff to keep the story straight. Otherwise you will be a villain on the 22:00 news.

In terms of tactics, by going Overt, the logistics train had to be lengthened. By my metric, an overwatch would have been ****ing MANDATORY, as well, they then presented themselves as a target, not only to bad actors, but also to LE. Without a support structure, they were pissing up a rope if the situation went sideways.

A Covert approach would have afforded these dudes a lot of latitude in operations. A slick PC under a baggy shirt, and a couple of Glocks with G18 mags would have been plenty of firepower for their mission. They could have run throat-mics for Comms, and not projected much of a presence. By going Covert, they would have eliminated the need for auxiliary support, PIOs, etc.

YMMV

[Moose-Knuckle]

The biggest problem with the OKs in Ferguson is that it was not SHTF. Sure there were some disturbances and a shooting but the grid was not down, ATMs were spitting out Federal Reserve fiat currency, and everyone had a full belly. IMHO this was a publicity stunt by Info Wars.

Now on the other side of the coin no one ****ed with them. But say they had, and the OKs had to use deadly force to defend themselves . . . they would be crucified in the court of public opinion not to mention the civil rights industry and the DOJ.

The difference here is that you and I won't be putting ourselves intentionally at ground zero of a race riot, in fact we would be evading from the area putting distance between ourselves/families/etc. and the mob.

[TXBK]

The difference here is that you and I won't be putting ourselves intentionally at ground zero of a race riot, in fact we would be evading from the area putting distance between ourselves/families/etc. and the mob.

That is the #1, most important action I would consider anytime a crowd began to form.

I also think that, in this case, the media was probably doing more to protect the OK's than the OK's were doing to protect the media. If all of the cameras and reporters not been around, they may not have received a pass from the crowd. Even good intentions don't always equal good ideas.

[Bryan84]

Lots of ideas in the thread.

[elephant]

The DailyMail article claims that they are carrying automatic rifles.

I heard they were the same weapons that are issued to Seal Team 6

[Wake27]

I'm with Outlander on the whole concept. Rolling deep with a lot of other qualified personnel and support is the only way to go overt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk