Self Defense

[LawDog]

Carol,
Remember in many situations the attacker does not have to "throw" the first strike.
Besides an attack there are also "active" and "passive" threats.
When there is an active threat, especially with a weapon, you can respond with a pre-emptive move.
Examples,
*If a person is holding a knife and states that he is going to stick you, then responding with pre-emptive impacts, pushes and / or throws is good.
*The same is true when a person raises up a fist and states that he is going to "break your face" with it then using a pre-emptive move is good.
And so on.

[punisher73]

Originally Posted by LawDog

Carol,
Remember in many situations the attacker does not have to "throw" the first strike.
Besides an attack there are also "active" and "passive" threats.
When there is an active threat, especially with a weapon, you can respond with a pre-emptive move.
Examples,
*If a person is holding a knife and states that he is going to stick you, then responding with pre-emptive impacts, pushes and / or throws is good.
*The same is true when a person raises up a fist and states that he is going to "break your face" with it then using a pre-emptive move is good.
And so on.

Agreed, the other key thing is being able to articulate those reasons if you are talking with the police. To claim self-defense you have the "duty to retreat" in many states (as always, consult your local laws and how the current prosecutor interprets them and seek the legal advise of a lawyer) this means that YOU have to attempt to leave the situation before it becomes physical. This means that the two of you arguing back and forth calling each others names and the guy pushes you, is NOT self-defense you were a willing participant through the process. If you can articulate your attempt to leave and/or why you COULDN'T leave or increase distance from them, then you have fulfilled the first requirement that many states have. The second thing is articulated "why" you hit them first. As Mr. Cunningham pointed out, if someone is drawing back their fist and telling you they are going to hit you and you can state why that was a credible threat and the person had the means to carry it out you can protect yourself at that point. If we are 20 feet apart and the person does the same action and hasn't made an attempt to close the distance with you, than at that point they don't have the ability to carry out the threat. You would not be justified in running at them and drop kicking them. LOL

[Touch Of Death]

Originally Posted by LawDog

First and most important the following is my own point of view on this subject and not an attack on any system or person.
There are many martial arts systems that teach a self defense type of a system and to me there is nothing wrong with this.
I tend to look at "Self Defense" as a negitive. One often hears about a fighter who defended himself well during a fight. To me this means that the fighter was beaten badly, he might have held out but, most of important, was not in control of the situation.
The same holds true with military units. During a battle many units have been known to have defended themselves very well. To me this means that they did not or could not control of the situation very well.
I believe that a good "defense" is a very strong offense. One should take control of any situation and not let your opponent control it. This does not mean that you will always win but it is a needed step on a path to a win or surviving. In many cases this can depend on your ability to take control of the situation.

On multiple attacks, if you sit back and defend they will not have any offensive pressure but on them so now they can work together as an offensive multi front.
This is a mind set I know but it is a students training that will develop a "defensive" or "offensive" mind set.
State of mind = your actions.

I think its important not to fall into sport mentalities and habbits during a real life situation; so, I think its important to market "self defense" in your system if that is indeed what you offer.
Sean

[LawDog]

Chris,
Your not alone with the "fear" thing. Our domestic violence laws have a little provision in it, if a person who is a relative or has had a relationship with you is afraid of you, even if you did nothing to cause the fear, it's cuff em and stuff em time.
Right or wrong is not the subject here.

I know, I am a little of subject here.

[Hudson69]

I think the Army has it right when they call their system Combatives. My department still calls our proprietary system Defensive Tactics but being an instructor we drill new recruit officers and veterans alike that we do not wait for someone to hit or attempt to hit us in order to take action.

A small example of this is scenario training with a party who is passive resistive but begins either making statements about fighting/not-going to jail or rolling his hands into fists. If any of these take place and there is reason to go hands on then we can engage in an offensive manner. We do not wait until the other person is set to attack. I hear that Krav is like this as well. There is rumor that we will soon be calling our system Police Combatives but I will believe that when I see it.

[seasoned]

Originally Posted by Hudson69

I think the Army has it right when they call their system Combatives. My department still calls our proprietary system Defensive Tactics but being an instructor we drill new recruit officers and veterans alike that we do not wait for someone to hit or attempt to hit us in order to take action.

A small example of this is scenario training with a party who is passive resistive but begins either making statements about fighting/not-going to jail or rolling his hands into fists. If any of these take place and there is reason to go hands on then we can engage in an offensive manner. We do not wait until the other person is set to attack. I hear that Krav is like this as well. There is rumor that we will soon be calling our system Police Combatives but I will believe that when I see it.

When their hands go up defensively, the oc comes out. Their action plus one.

[celtic_crippler]

This is another opportuntiy to remind folks to check into, and be aware of the laws where they live.

In my state, someone doesn't have to necessarily take a swing at me for it to be considered "assault" and I am legally within my rights to use force if I percieve aggressive actions or even words as a threat.

For example: If I am addressed by an individual and they say something to the effect of, "I gonna kick your butt" and are within range to commit an attack when they say it, I can flatten their nose before they get the the "..tt" completely out of thier mouth.

I agree whole-heartedly with Lawdog and others that endorce a more aggressive stance on "self-defense." In kenpo, we also follow the principle of "defense-offense/offensive-defense"

In order to help increase one's chances of coming out on top in a confrontation you have to become aggressive, and down-right mean.

Within the kenpo salutation lies the concept of "asking forgiveness if forced to use it." I interpret that as asking forgivenss for having to become uncivilized and animal-like. One has to be more brutal than the aggressor to survive and you can't do that and remain humane at the same time. If you do, then you will likely lose.

You must overwhelm the attacker to end the confrontation quickly and help ensure that you escape without serious injury or worse. The moment you drop your guard or back off without adequately dealing with an attacker you give them another opportunity to harm you and you don't want to give them another chance to hurt or kill you.

Remember, you didn't start it...they did. They chose that path and therefore chose the consequences.

I know that comes off as hard-line to some people, but that's just the reality of it.

The streets aren't a ring and there's no referee to stop the match. Would you rather be the one in control and decides when it's over or do you trust the attacker to back off when you've had enough?

I don't know about you, but I'm not that trusting of someone who's already made it clear they plan on putting me in the hospital or morgue.

[Sigung86]

Originally Posted by Milt G.

Hello,
I agree, I think...

As long as you do not become the real instigater of the "altercation" I do believe in a strong offense being one of the best defenses.

We live in a society steeped in litigation. You would not wish to be the one "targeted" by the legal boys. I think that is why the term self-DEFENSE is used so often. While there are cases that you are justified in attacking first, I think they are generally in the minority. I think that when one is facing multiple "potential" attackers striking first does have merit. You will, of course, have to prove (if the legal system gets ahold of you) that you felt threatened to the level of "attacking" the group of "miscreants" on some level.

I think I see what you are getting at, and think I agree wholeheartedly.

Good topic, Thank you.
Milt G.

Hi Milt! Long time no talk. I'm kind of leaning toward taking the term self defense out of my "titles"... And changing to self-protection. That's actually more what we have become now-a-days. Many schools using the term "self defense" in their titles don't really teach much of that at all. Kind of like my taking a black belt in under a year in Tang Soo Do, back in 1969 fromt he ROK Army. It was "basic" and vicious with the use of feet and legs. It certainly provided extra tools for my Kenpo conversion in '71.

Now look at what most of the Korean Arts have become, at least in my estimation, and no offense intended to anyone. Much of it appears to be a parody of a fighting art. As a matter of fact, the Boeing Health Insurance Group considers TKD to be a Martial Sport and not a Martial Art.
Yet many of the TKD schools still tout themselves as martial Arts and Self-Defense and so the considered change to Self-Protection.

If you think I'm wrong, it's Okey-Dokey... Please yell at me via private email so's I kin keep my squeeky-clean image.

[5-0 Kenpo]

Originally Posted by James Kovacich

"Offense is defense and defense is offense" is a simple concept that Gung Fu based systems share. The "as you know someone is going to raise their hands(to fight) You hit them," I doubt very much Sifu was the first to think of that.

Legality is irrevalent in a confrontation in which you have no way of knowing how it will end.

A lot of people are in jail who have felt this way.

[LawDog]

Hesitation = hospital / grave.