Kelly McCanns knife techinques are they dangerous?

[Mider1985]

Im not an expert ive never had a knife fight nor do i wanna. But from alot of experts they usually try to disarm you if you have a knife, in fact most experts say to simply run when your in a knife attack but if you cant that you have to take that gun away or at least have an equalizer. create distance till you can get out your own weapon such as a gun or another knife. Or take the attackers knife away. Knife fighting is really tricky not everyone comes at you like in the movie PYSCHO with the knife overhead etc etc.

So I totally utterly respect Mister McCann and Im not saying this wont work because maybe it will he after all is an expert. But im just saying that from everything ive heard in self defense from experts like the Dog Brothers, Dan Inosanto, Paul Vunak is to take that knife away or have another weapon.

 

[WC_lun]

This short clip doesn't jive with what I was taught about weapon defense. You try to isolate the threat. Counting on a person to turn thier head from attacks isn't reliable, in my opinion. Some people won't turn away and others will lash out reflexively with thier weapon. Fighting someone with a weapon is always a dangerous option. The key is to slant everything possible in your favor. Not controlling the person or the weapon does not slant things in your favor.

 

[Carol]

Why not train with a live instructor?

 

[bribrius]

he covered and would have had a knife stuck in his gut. stepped in on someone with a knife with no guard, and no control or real attempt to control the weapon.

i wouldn't advise it.

 

[Bruno@MT]

He looks to me like one of those 'experts' who don't want anything to do with that 'traditional martial arts crap'.
First thing: his system is called self offense. I'm sure that any DA will have a field day with that.
Second: some of the things he showed would have him stuck like a pig with anything bigger than a box cutter.
Third: by focusing so hard on the hands, he really looks socially awkward (which does not help to defuse a situation) and he loses track of everything else. Look at the entire person, or the face / shoulders area, and be aware of the surroundings.
Fourth: pre-emptively beating the snot out of the other guy... that is going to get you some serious prison time if it turns out the other guy was just reaching for his cell phone or somethign else.

I'd say this was a FAIL.

 

[punisher73]

While I didn't agree with everything he said, it is a snapshot and one idea he is presenting not a total picture of his approach.

That being said, the couple of guys I have talked with who really fought a guy with a knife both employed a very similiar approach. Immediately attack the person and incapcitate the arm/body to control the knife because you have taken out the other person.

Not saying that this is the only approach nor will it work everytime, but it is a tactic that does work. It also involves a very aggressive mindset and awareness that needs to be there for it to work also.

 

[frank raud]

Mccann briefly covered various options before showing what is his preferred method. As McCann spends most of his time teaching folks like Blackwater and various government orgs, there may be a different mindset than a more defensive oriented art.

Does it work? Try it with a shock knife, you will get immediate feedback. Is it the only way? Of course not.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

It is hard to paint a picture from one brief video glimpse.
While I do not like everything Kelly McCann shows he does
have some decent stuff. That being said in my opinion he is
not a top tier martial practitioner aka self defense
expert but instead someone with some decent skills and
a lot of marketing!

Now let's take a look at this particular clip. One thing he
say's is not to watch their eyes. This is correct because
if someone sees you staring at their eyes they can easily
fool you with them. I do this all the time to people that
I work with it is easy and simple. If I catch someone
watching my eyes they will get hit and rather easily.
I will look where I want them to think the attack is
coming and then simply attack some place else! (simple to do)
However to watch the hand as he advises is not so good. Why?
Because the hand is very fast and with some people
very, very fast. If you are watching the hand more
than likely you would be cut before you could do
anything. However if you utilize all around periperal
vision and focus on the shoulders and hips which
in comparison move very slowly then you will
increase your chances. Some times just striking
the other guy will work! That part is true but...
control of the weapon bearing hand is a whole lot better
and works well particularly if you have already hit the attacker.
Still it may not be available or simply not needed as
every situation is different.

As any good instructor would mention run away or
utilize an equalizer, another tool to increase your
chances. However, we all know that some times
you just cannot run or get a tool and your empty
hands will be it. If that happens you are in really
deep you know what! In that case generally the best
thing to do is create damage on your opponent
and gain control over their weapon bearing hand
and or over their body structure!

Once again very, very hard to tell anything about
someone from just a glimpse of what they do. Instead
in order to get an overall judgement it is better to
have seen them teach, etc. in person!

 

[sgtmac_46]

Im not an expert ive never had a knife fight nor do i wanna. But from alot of experts they usually try to disarm you if you have a knife, in fact most experts say to simply run when your in a knife attack but if you cant that you have to take that gun away or at least have an equalizer. create distance till you can get out your own weapon such as a gun or another knife. Or take the attackers knife away. Knife fighting is really tricky not everyone comes at you like in the movie PYSCHO with the knife overhead etc etc.

So I totally utterly respect Mister McCann and Im not saying this wont work because maybe it will he after all is an expert. But im just saying that from everything ive heard in self defense from experts like the Dog Brothers, Dan Inosanto, Paul Vunak is to take that knife away or have another weapon.

Actually, the principles are pretty sound. They are different than trying to disarm, but it's very much like what we teach in LE training, which is to by-pass the attack, clear off line, and then access our weapon.

Keep in mind the techniques in the video work BEST when you 'Pre-Empt' the attack, not in the middle of a sewing machine style prison attack.

 

[sgtmac_46]

He looks to me like one of those 'experts' who don't want anything to do with that 'traditional martial arts crap'.
First thing: his system is called self offense. I'm sure that any DA will have a field day with that.
Second: some of the things he showed would have him stuck like a pig with anything bigger than a box cutter.
Third: by focusing so hard on the hands, he really looks socially awkward (which does not help to defuse a situation) and he loses track of everything else. Look at the entire person, or the face / shoulders area, and be aware of the surroundings.
Fourth: pre-emptively beating the snot out of the other guy... that is going to get you some serious prison time if it turns out the other guy was just reaching for his cell phone or somethign else.

I'd say this was a FAIL.

Ehhhh.....I don't know......Yes, it's possible you could clobber a clown who's reaching for a cell phone. But, then, why is he intentionally confronting you while blocking your path? Context is everything, and folks that would harm you don't carry around a sign that says 'Hey, i'm about to stab you in the gut'.

The hands are what will kill you. Period. Being aware of the surroundings are important, but the hands are what will kill you. Be it a knife he comes out with are a .38.

If you can't pre-emptively attack a knifer or a gunman, you're WAY behind the curb, and may just die.

Personally i'm a much bigger fan of what Marc Denny is doing with his DLO material, and the training i've been getting in Garimot, but the concepts are sound from Kelly McCann, imho.

 

[MJS]

I didn't think the clip was that bad. Like Sgt said, I like the DLO stuff, as well as Redzone. IMO, what he's showing is alot more effective than alot of the traditional stuff that we see in many arts.

Control the weapon, and then counter strike or cover/control/strike, such as we saw in the clip. As for the pre-empt stuff....well, in this case we're talking about a deadly weapon. If someone was holding the weapon, and you fired off a shot before the guy had a chance to stab, slash, then IMO, you did the right thing. Someone is that close to you, holding a weapon...well, lets look at what their motives are. Are they going to use it? Are they using it for the purpose of intimidation? Sorry, I'm not going to wait to find out. If I can get a good shot, that'll buy me time to hopefully get the hell out of there, I'm going to take it. I'd be willing to bet, and I'm sure the LEOs here could vouch for this, but if they were on a mv stop or questioning someone on the street, and that person made any quick, sudden moves, that person would probably find themselves being brought to the ground very quick, or having a gun pointed at them.

I agree with what Punisher said regarding the aggressive mindset. IMO, if you're going to go ahead with a defense, this is the best way to go.

 

[Josh Oakley]

Overall, I give it a B-minus.

It's already been said, but this "focus on the hands" is a dangerously foolish concept. My reasoning:

1) He has two hands. If you're looking one way, you can't see the other.
2) Peripheral vision will give you the pertinent information of his angle of attack more quickly.
3) If you're not already looking at the hand before the attack begins, the time it takes to observe and orientate to the hand is long enough that you could very likely be cut by the time you respond to the threat.
4) If you are aready looking, it's a provoking action. It clearly signals your intention to fight, and gives away how you intend to start.

As for the overal technique, I mostly like it. However, taking some control of the shankin' hand would be preferrable, especially since one of his big objectives is not to get cut. And it can easily be worked into the technique he's working with.

 

[Mider1985]

The only problem i have with the clip is that he doesnt take that knife away.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Mccann briefly covered various options before showing what is his preferred method. As McCann spends most of his time teaching folks like Blackwater and various government orgs, there may be a different mindset than a more defensive oriented art.

Does it work? Try it with a shock knife, you will get immediate feedback. Is it the only way? Of course not.

Organizations like blackwater are mercenaries for hire. I don't think they worry at all about beating up the wrong guy or the legality of what they are doing.

For regular civilians, preemptively beating up someone is not going to work. In his example, the weapon was not even visible so you are working on the assumption that a) there will be a weapon, and b) there will be an attack.

 

[Bruno@MT]

I didn't think the clip was that bad. Like Sgt said, I like the DLO stuff, as well as Redzone. IMO, what he's showing is alot more effective than alot of the traditional stuff that we see in many arts.

Control the weapon, and then counter strike or cover/control/strike, such as we saw in the clip.

In the clip, the weapon was hidden. So he didn't know there was one, and he didn't know what it would be. If he did that and the other guy was stabbing him with a dagger, he'd be hit really bad in the torso.

As for the pre-empt stuff....well, in this case we're talking about a deadly weapon. If someone was holding the weapon, and you fired off a shot before the guy had a chance to stab, slash, then IMO, you did the right thing.

Yes, but there was no weapon visible.
Your honor, I shot him before he could do something because I thought he might have had a weapon.

 

[frank raud]

Organizations like blackwater are mercenaries for hire. I don't think they worry at all about beating up the wrong guy or the legality of what they are doing.

For regular civilians, preemptively beating up someone is not going to work. In his example, the weapon was not even visible so you are working on the assumption that a) there will be a weapon, and b) there will be an attack.

So, am I to understand that if you are confronted by an unknown person, and they are blocking your movement, you assume an assault won't be taking place, and they don't have a weapon?

In Canada, where I live, the self defense laws allow you to pre-emptively strike(if you can justify it) "Criminal code section 36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures. "

McCann presents a scenario, and a solution. Is it THE solution? Mebbe not. He touches on the legal aspect, and the contradiction on occasion between actual self defense and the law. What I saw on the clip was McCann blocking an incoming blow and attacking, perhaps you saw something different.

 

[jks9199]

Organizations like blackwater are mercenaries for hire. I don't think they worry at all about beating up the wrong guy or the legality of what they are doing.

For regular civilians, preemptively beating up someone is not going to work. In his example, the weapon was not even visible so you are working on the assumption that a) there will be a weapon, and b) there will be an attack.

The professionals who work for companies like Blackwater (now called Xe) generally do care about obeying the law and the rules of engagement where they are working. They also care about making it home to enjoy the money they're earning... They have been more aggressive than official forces might like -- but they must stay within the law. Don't get caught in the "mercenaries are evil" trap. At various times in history, the majority of professional soldiers have been mercenaries.

As to the use of preemptive force -- as a general concept of US law (general caveat: I am not a lawyer nor is this legal advice), you may use reasonable force to protect yourself from IMMINENT attack. The means you don't have to be shot, stabbed, punched, or whatever. You can act as soon as you reasonably believe that the person was about to attack you. Note, though, that some states may require you to retreat if possible and practical. You'll have to justify your actions either way, as well. And the force must be reasonable to the threat.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Your honor, I shot him before he could do something because I thought he might have had a weapon.

Quite frankly, there are very real very legitimate situations where that has been said, and rightly so, and been found to be justified by the court. The real world isn't always so cut and dry.

A lot of it has to do with a phrase we use in law enforcement...'The Totality of the Circumstances'.

You may end up shooting a guy who's gun you never saw based on his behavior and how it fit in to the totality of the circumstances.

 

[MJS]

In the clip, the weapon was hidden. So he didn't know there was one, and he didn't know what it would be. If he did that and the other guy was stabbing him with a dagger, he'd be hit really bad in the torso.

Just so I'm understanding correctly here...you're saying if the guy did a thrust to the stomach, the defender would be stabbed? This clip seems to be predicated on the slash. I'm sure, were the attack a thrust, the response would be different. Then again, I've heard stories of people being cut, still fighting/defending themselves, and didn't realize they were cut until it was over.

Yes, but there was no weapon visible.
Your honor, I shot him before he could do something because I thought he might have had a weapon.

Are we still talking about the clip? If so, could you point me to that spot? JKs and Sgtmac commented on this, so I can't add much more. I still stand by that though...if someone is that close to me, and is making sudden or aggressive moves, I'm not waiting.

 

[Mider1985]

Just so I'm understanding correctly here...you're saying if the guy did a thrust to the stomach, the defender would be stabbed? This clip seems to be predicated on the slash. I'm sure, were the attack a thrust, the response would be different. Then again, I've heard stories of people being cut, still fighting/defending themselves, and didn't realize they were cut until it was over.





Are we still talking about the clip? If so, could you point me to that spot? JKs and Sgtmac commented on this, so I can't add much more. I still stand by that though...if someone is that close to me, and is making sudden or aggressive moves, I'm not waiting.

My overall problem with the clip is the not disarming the knife. Do you think he should have disarmed the guy or let him keep the weapon?