Open Hand techniques are just plain silly...

[thardey]

I daily carry a phone, a knife, a gun, and practice empty-hand techs.

The knife is a tool primarily, I use it a lot on generic stuff, but I do know how to use it.

The gun is only as useful to me as I can draw and fire it. I've been spending a lot of time on the firearms forum getting advice on quick-draw techs. A holstered gun does nothing for me.

The phone is my first weapon of choice, but it takes time to "deploy." At best I can dial 911 and have them recording the incident.

That said, what am I supposed to do until I can get the other weapons into play? If I not surprised -- well no issue. I leave before I get trapped, or deploy my phone, gun, or knife.

If I am surprised, I need to buy some time with the only (physical) weapons that are constantly deployed -- hands and feet.

Some people think that because I have a black belt, that I have no need to carry a weapon. On the contrary, by black belt training is there to give me the opportunity to bring the weapon into play.

 

[myusername]

Wow, that kind of strategy would just get him taken out with the right person on the streets here in the USA. As for myself, his first attempt at hitting me would put me into a mode that would not likely yield my wallet, but a reaction that would deal with the immediate threat at hand. His strategy is quite risky!

Yes I should imagine that this guys mugging strategy may not translate to a country where people can carry firearms! To be honest he wasn't the brightest spark I ever met but I think that he would pick his victims based on how likely they looked to be able put up a fight. Still there is always the risk of picking on the wrong person!

WTF? A committed assault on you and you aren't going to protect yourself or attempt to flee? Why would you wait to find out what they want?

Reading through my original post I can see that I didn't make myself 100% clear. Of course I will try and flee if I see the opportunity and by no means will I allow myself to be a punchbag. But I maintain in that situation my primary method of defence will be to give the mugger the wallet so that they leave me alone. I know this is all theory but I don't imagine getting mugged is pretty and I would expect to be a bit roughed up from what I have heard. I think resisting too much initially would get me hurt more but if the mugger continued attacking even when he has the wallet then I hope something would kick in and I would know for definate that anything goes because I will be fighting for my life.

You probably should practice that often so you don't end up hurting the attacker or yourself quick drawing your wallet.

LOL! Don't worry my girlfriend makes sure I getting plenty of practice quick drawing my wallet! :wink1:

 

[myusername]

wow just...wow. Your mindset needs some serious work. I truly hope that you don't find yourself in a violent encounter before you've had a chance to revise your thinking.

Like I said to BigShadow I admit I probably didn't make myself that clear with my post. I would obviously try and get away if I had the chance and I would naturally not allow myself to be a punchbag. However, I think to fight back too strongly early on could get me hurt a lot more? Surely if the mugger is just after my wallet when they have it they will leave me alone. Now if I gave them the wallet and they persisted in beating me then I would in no doubt that I am in a fight for survival and would throw everything I've got at them to stay alive.

I think the difference in our responses comes down to confidence at the end of the day. I am very new to the martial arts not yet getting beyond white belt so my confidence in my ability to fight off a determined mugger is quite low at the moment. My strengths at present are as a result of my mental health nurse training - I can keep cool and talk under pressure and I know some basic breakaway techniques from my control and restraint training that can minimise harm to myself. Therefore, I do think the safest option for me is to give the mugger what they want as quickly as possible. It's about making a risk assessment at the time of the incident and recognising my limitations.

 

[tellner]

in this day and age, right? I mean really, most altercations these days involve some sort of weapon. A mugger isn't going to mug you by coming up to you and saying "I have lethal hands, now give me all your money" no, he is going to be yielding a knife or a gun or some other form of weaponry that is going to make him feel he has the upper hand on you.

So, isn't it safe to safe if you train empty hand techniques for self defense that it is silly? Cause what you really need is some fire power or weapon techniques to really save your butt?

You really need to do a little bit of research before saying things like this. Most simple assaults do not involve weapons. Neither do most aggravated assaults or the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults. The last few years that I looked at the UCR and NCVS data only a bare majority or robberies involved weapons.

The idea that you have to have a weapon for real self defense is a very dangerous and frankly stupid one. It fosters utter dependency. If someone really swallows the "without a weapon you're toast" line they will be prone to give up if they don't have a gun, knife, sword or whatever and will look outside themselves for their personal safety. That's a suicidally bad attitude.

Let's go back a moment and consider those sexual assaults. A blade or bullet is a very good thing to have if someone is trying to stick tab A into slot B, C, D or E (don't ask) without your permission. But it isn't always available and it often isn't apparent that it will be appropriate until it's too late to effectively deploy. Unless you're suggesting a "shoot first and don't bother to ask questions" approach the dependency strategy is a very poor one.

 

[Lisa]

You really need to do a little bit of research before saying things like this. Most simple assaults do not involve weapons. Neither do most aggravated assaults or the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults. The last few years that I looked at the UCR and NCVS data only a bare majority or robberies involved weapons.

The idea that you have to have a weapon for real self defense is a very dangerous and frankly stupid one. It fosters utter dependency. If someone really swallows the "without a weapon you're toast" line they will be prone to give up if they don't have a gun, knife, sword or whatever and will look outside themselves for their personal safety. That's a suicidally bad attitude.

Let's go back a moment and consider those sexual assaults. A blade or bullet is a very good thing to have if someone is trying to stick tab A into slot B, C, D or E (don't ask) without your permission. But it isn't always available and it often isn't apparent that it will be appropriate until it's too late to effectively deploy. Unless you're suggesting a "shoot first and don't bother to ask questions" approach the dependency strategy is a very poor one.

Sometimes posing the question in a way that gets people to react and have a good discussion doesn't necessarily mean that its the way one truly thinks.

 

[Kacey]

Like I said to BigShadow I admit I probably didn't make myself that clear with my post. I would obviously try and get away if I had the chance and I would naturally not allow myself to be a punchbag. However, I think to fight back too strongly early on could get me hurt a lot more? Surely if the mugger is just after my wallet when they have it they will leave me alone. Now if I gave them the wallet and they persisted in beating me then I would in no doubt that I am in a fight for survival and would throw everything I've got at them to stay alive.

I think the difference in our responses comes down to confidence at the end of the day. I am very new to the martial arts not yet getting beyond white belt so my confidence in my ability to fight off a determined mugger is quite low at the moment. My strengths at present are as a result of my mental health nurse training - I can keep cool and talk under pressure and I know some basic breakaway techniques from my control and restraint training that can minimise harm to myself. Therefore, I do think the safest option for me is to give the mugger what they want as quickly as possible. It's about making a risk assessment at the time of the incident and recognising my limitations.

Your last line is the key to any type of avoidance or defense, and I agree with it completely.

 

[tellner]

Sometimes posing the question in a way that gets people to react and have a good discussion doesn't necessarily mean that its the way one truly thinks.

Heh. Gotcha.

 

[Makalakumu]

One of the things that I recenty learned and found very interesting is that in traditional karate, weapons are supposed to come first. Empty hand flows from weapon techniques. The sensei who told me this and demonstrated said something very simple, "why train your least effective weapons the most?"

 

[MJS]

in this day and age, right? I mean really, most altercations these days involve some sort of weapon. A mugger isn't going to mug you by coming up to you and saying "I have lethal hands, now give me all your money" no, he is going to be yielding a knife or a gun or some other form of weaponry that is going to make him feel he has the upper hand on you.

So, isn't it safe to safe if you train empty hand techniques for self defense that it is silly? Cause what you really need is some fire power or weapon techniques to really save your butt?

Well, I'm a big advocate of grabbing an equalizer, especially when there is a weapon in play. Now, this doesnt have to be a gun or knife, it can be a stick, a lamp, a belt or rock...basically, anything I can get my hands on. But, if no weapons or equalizers are available, you're going to need to be capable to using empty hand defense.

 

[MJS]

Bold is mine.

I think I understand what you are saying however, does everyone really believe that you would have opportunity to use those techniques to disarm and be successful in doing so without causing yourself or others bodily harm from the weapon in question?

I know you're directing this to someone else, but I'll toss in my 2 pennies.

IMHO, yes, there is a chance that we can be successful in the disarm. Will we be injured in the process? I'd say yes, there is a good chance of that, just like there'd be a good chance of being injured in an empty hand fight.

Alot of it comes down to how one trains the defense.

 

[Rich Parsons]

in this day and age, right? I mean really, most altercations these days involve some sort of weapon. A mugger isn't going to mug you by coming up to you and saying "I have lethal hands, now give me all your money" no, he is going to be yielding a knife or a gun or some other form of weaponry that is going to make him feel he has the upper hand on you.

So, isn't it safe to safe if you train empty hand techniques for self defense that it is silly? Cause what you really need is some fire power or weapon techniques to really save your butt?

Lisa,

I thought you were going to talk about closed hand versus open techniques. I prefer open hand techniques.

But to your point, I think it is NOT silly to train in empty hand techniques. Sometimes a person needs to react and to defend themselves with empty hands before they can clear and get a weapon on line.

I have lots of experience of not being able to get to a weapon on me as I was too busy dealing with the bad guy(s) coming at me. But that did not stop me from getting to it eventually or to use weapons of opportunity.

In most cases, if a person uses a knife they are considered to be using an offensive weapon while the fire arm is considered a defensive weapon. I have no understanding of how one can be offensive or defensive. They have a function as a tool and it is up to the person to determine the function of the tool.

Back in the day, after ODS (* Operation Dessert Storm *) there were many guys I knew who used weapons in security and were trained by the military as MP's in baton and or just plain fire arms training. But, even having seen combat some of them could not clear the weapon/tool they had or were carrying, and their empty hands training was lacking. I know there are police and ex military and current military here but, I think the average training of those mentioned in the previous sentence in empty hands is very lacking. Their training depends upon having back up on the radio or just next to them. The police that work alone have some idea, but many still think their uniform, badge and gun will inhibit people. It will inhibit the good guys and those who are not really bad guys. But the bad guys will not let that stop them. They will use what they want to get what they want even if it is just to get away.


Personally, I think empty hands training is required to be able to survive long enough to get to your weapon of choice. I think knife training is required as well so people will understand what a knife can do. I also think firearm training is good, but not required unless a person is willing to make the choice to carry and what that means.

 

[Hawke]

Good discussion and excellent replies.

Knife - instant draw.

Gun - hhhmm, if this was the Old West, I'll be dead. Takes too long for me to get the gun clear and ready.

Empty Hands - always with me wherever I go. The fastest weapons I can get ready to use.

I train in empty hands. I also train with sticks and knives. I believe in the equalizer concept (rock, broomstick, phone cord, car window, brick wall).

Train empty hands...now put a weapon in it....concept works with FMA (and other MAs as well).

 

[sgtmac_46]

in this day and age, right? I mean really, most altercations these days involve some sort of weapon. A mugger isn't going to mug you by coming up to you and saying "I have lethal hands, now give me all your money" no, he is going to be yielding a knife or a gun or some other form of weaponry that is going to make him feel he has the upper hand on you.

So, isn't it safe to safe if you train empty hand techniques for self defense that it is silly? Cause what you really need is some fire power or weapon techniques to really save your butt?

What happens when you find yourself in a 'Gun Free Zone'? Roll over and play dead?

Empty hand techniques are for when you can't bring a gun or other weapon or can't legally use one. What happens if you're on an airline flight and 9/11 part 2 happens? Unlikely? Probably, but you get the point. There are times and places in this society when all you've got is what you brought!

I've been a police officer for 11 years and a police trainer for much of that time.....does the fact that I carry a gun everywhere make empty hand techniques obsolete? Absolutely not! We can't shoot EVERYONE who resists! Heck, we can't TASER everyone who resists (say, he's covered in gasoline!) We can't pepperspray everyone who resists (say, he's in a HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM!) There are times when ONLY empthy hands will do!

 

[LawDog]

Though there are many assaults with weapons involved the empty hand attacks / assaults are still alive and well. The news media normally only reports on assaults that have been done with a weapon so I can understand why many feel that the majority of attacks are done with a weapon.
If someone attempts to assault you with a weapon and you defend with a weapon, once he / she loses their ability to use their weapon then you must stop using yours. At this time empty hands must come into play.
To a bad guy if you carry a weapon then he now has access to a weapon. In appearence many bad guys do not all have the sterio type of look and many good guys look like the bad guys. Many times bad guys are right up on you before you know it, you will probably not have time to clear leather. If this happens then it's time to use your backup, your empty hands.
:knight:

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I train in a practical tool based approach. I always want to have the advantage in some form or another and if I can have a tool advantage that would be great. Still if caught unawares with no tool in my hands I will need to defend myself either all the way with empty hands or until I can deploy a tool. So empty hands are important but even more important is if your system works in conjunctioin with tools so that they are interchangeable. Meaning that the way I move does not change wether I have a tool or I am using empty hands.

 

[kidswarrior]

I've had some interesting chats with ex-drug addicts who have been muggers in the past. I remember one chap said that he would go in really hard when mugging someone to put them into shock and he'd hit the victim first before demanding the wallet! He'd also throw a punch after they'd given it to him to stop them thinking about giving chase. His main interest was the wallet and the phone not hurting the victim but he still obviously felt it necessary to rough the victim up and didn't care if the victim got hurt in the process.

There's a lot of this on the streets here, too. The USA is a big place, and not monolithic by any means. Harder to carry a firearm--maybe harder still to carry a knife legally--in some places than in others. So, imho, must think about open hand options just for practicality.

The phone is my first weapon of choice, but it takes time to "deploy." At best I can dial 911 and have them recording the incident.

That said, what am I supposed to do until I can get the other weapons into play? If I not surprised -- well no issue. I leave before I get trapped, or deploy my phone, gun, or knife.

If I am surprised, I need to buy some time with the only (physical) weapons that are constantly deployed -- hands and feet.

A very realistic scenario, to me.

Most simple assaults do not involve weapons. Neither do most aggravated assaults or the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults. The last few years that I looked at the UCR and NCVS data only a bare majority or robberies involved weapons.

The idea that you have to have a weapon for real self defense is a very dangerous and frankly stupid one. It fosters utter dependency. If someone really swallows the "without a weapon you're toast" line they will be prone to give up if they don't have a gun, knife, sword or whatever and will look outside themselves for their personal safety. That's a suicidally bad attitude.

Agreed.

But to your point, I think it is NOT silly to train in empty hand techniques. Sometimes a person needs to react and to defend themselves with empty hands before they can clear and get a weapon on line.
Personally, I think empty hands training is required to be able to survive long enough to get to your weapon of choice. I think knife training is required as well so people will understand what a knife can do. I also think firearm training is good, but not required unless a person is willing to make the choice to carry and what that means.

Rich is on target (excuse the pun), once again.

Empty Hands - always with me wherever I go. The fastest weapons I can get ready to use.

Best summary of my own beliefs. Always legal to carry, always with you, and in my case, far better trained to deploy than any instrument, therefore probably much, much faster and pretty much always effective.

I don't feel that empty hand techniques are silly. I think you are going to come into contact with more non-weapon situations than those that involve a knife/gun.

Also, even if you do have a CCW there are plenty of restrictions on where you can legally carry it.

Another succinct, common sense reply.

 

[Bodhisattva]

in this day and age, right? I mean really, most altercations these days involve some sort of weapon. A mugger isn't going to mug you by coming up to you and saying "I have lethal hands, now give me all your money" no, he is going to be yielding a knife or a gun or some other form of weaponry that is going to make him feel he has the upper hand on you.

So, isn't it safe to safe if you train empty hand techniques for self defense that it is silly? Cause what you really need is some fire power or weapon techniques to really save your butt?

No. That's actually not true.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Though there are many assaults with weapons involved the empty hand attacks / assaults are still alive and well. The news media normally only reports on assaults that have been done with a weapon so I can understand why many feel that the majority of attacks are done with a weapon.
If someone attempts to assault you with a weapon and you defend with a weapon, once he / she loses their ability to use their weapon then you must stop using yours. At this time empty hands must come into play.
To a bad guy if you carry a weapon then he now has access to a weapon. In appearence many bad guys do not all have the sterio type of look and many good guys look like the bad guys. Many times bad guys are right up on you before you know it, you will probably not have time to clear leather. If this happens then it's time to use your backup, your empty hands.
:knight:

Absolutely correct! In many situations involving weapons, the space and time requirements require empty hands to control and repel and initial attack before your own weapon can even be accessed!

 

[Scarey]

Well here in the UK walking around with firepower or any concealed weapon would get me arrested no questions asked! I would also argue that if you are being mugged and you have time to draw a weapon you also have time to run away or give the mugger your wallet, both of which are by far the better self defence techniques under the circumstances!

If a mugger points a gun at you, give them what they want! Any move to draw a weapon could end your life! I would say that even if the mugger had a knife or a blunt instrument attempting to draw your own weapon could lead to disaster! You don't know how good they are with it or how psychopathic their nature!

A person who is attempting to mug you expects you to reach behind your back. How else would you get your wallet? They know you are pulling out a hidden object. They tend to be caught off guard when the wallet you just pulled out shoots them. Another trick is to do what stage magicians and con artistes do, take advantage of the fact that people watch the hand that's doing what they want to see. While you retrieve your wallet with one hand pull your gun with the other.

On Another note. I feel very sorry for all of you who live in places where the government expects you to die because a criminal doesn't want to be identified in a lineup. Hopefully we can maintain our rights here in the States, in spite of the ravenous anti-gun idiots.

 

[Lisa]

No. That's actually not true.

So, what is true then?