Non injurious, humane self defense?

[Joab]

Are there self defense systems that are practical (ie-they work) and normally do not seriously injure an attacker? If so what are they? Are they the future of self defense and the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Of course I can already hear one question coming: What constitutes "serious injury" to an attacker? Well, I would say an injury that puts one in the hospital, say a broken bone, busted knee, a jaw that needs to be wired shut, and the like. Not seriously injured would be a bruise, soreness, and the like.

 

[K831]

Are there self defense systems that are practical (ie-they work) and normally do not seriously injure an attacker? If so what are they? Are they the future of self defense and the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Of course I can already hear one question coming: What constitutes "serious injury" to an attacker? Well, I would say an injury that puts one in the hospital, say a broken bone, busted knee, a jaw that needs to be wired shut, and the like. Not seriously injured would be a bruise, soreness, and the like.

Any attacker you can stop by giving him a bruise was probably not a real threat in the first place.

All decent self defense systems contain what you mention, the option to

not seriously injure an attacker?

it just depends on the application of the practitioner. However, any art or style containing techiques designed only to cause

bruise, soreness, and the like.

is woefuly inadequate.

Lastly, your serious injury list

an injury that puts one in the hospital, say a broken bone, busted knee, a jaw that needs to be wired shut,

takes very little force to acomplish.

the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Isn't a pathetically watered down martial art, but rather, proper discipline, situational awarness, knowledge of you local SD law and past precident. Also, I think each person has to define, for themselves, what they will and won't do in the name of SD or defense of others. Think this through and decide BEFORE you are faced with the situation. Come to terms with it, and then do what needs to be done, regardless of potential legal outcomes.

 

[jks9199]

You may be interested in learning about or learning the Bando Monk System; it's a non-violent martial art system. Heavy emphasis is placed on learning to control oneself, and to use methods which do the least practical harm (ideally, no unrecoverable injury) to an attacker.

It might also help if you explained more about why you're looking for something like this...

 

[still learning]

Hello, Verbal training? ....maybe JUDO?

Guns.....stops lots of people....and you don't have to shoot them too...study this further....

Humane self-defense? .....using power of langauges...proper wording!
------------------------------------
The "power" of LOVE? ....um?
------------------------------------

...having a army behind you....facing one person....works! most likely the one person will not attack?
-------------------------------------
Tazers? ..pepper sprays?
-----------------------------------
Having a "killer instincts" and the other person see it!
---------------------------------
USA- has nuclear bombs....and most other nations...will not attack...
NON-use of weapons is a humane self-defense....
---------------------------------
STUDY- joints locks....most likey what you are looking for....

Aloha, lock the joints...locks the attacker, locks of luck!!!

 

[Mike Hamer]

I agree with these posts, but the first thing that comes to my mind is Aikido.

 

[Ironcrane]

I would say give Judo a try. Some of those throws will hurt someone enough to keep them from getting back up, without putting them in the hospital. Depending, of course, on how hard you put the person down, and what kind of shape they're in.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Are there self defense systems that are practical (ie-they work) and normally do not seriously injure an attacker? If so what are they? Are they the future of self defense and the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Well, there isn't any.
It is the person using it who decides whether the other guy ends up in the hospital. Take aikido for example. You can use it in many different ways. Depending on how you use it, you can either inflict pain with the goal of submitting you opponent, or you just break whatever appendage you manage to grab.

The same goes for ninpo, ju-jutsu, karate, ... everything basically.
You learn techniques, and depending on how you use them, you injure the other person.

Judo was already mentioned, but that is misleading. Using judo, you have a lot of options. Several of those let you drop the other guy on his head -> injury. Even a simple throw will cause significant injury of the other guy doesn't know how to fall, or hits something on his way down.

Really, it is not the art, it is the person using it.

 

[Hudson69]

I have been doing this for a while and I have never done serious injury to anyone using defensive tactics (LEO) and I cannot think of anyone else on my department or anyone from the County (the Deputies) having done so either.

We use our own system and the County uses Krav Maga both are very practical, take only about 40 hrs to get the core of it and mostly about control although the Krav stuff seems a little more ...."violent?"

 

[Joab]

You may be interested in learning about or learning the Bando Monk System; it's a non-violent martial art system. Heavy emphasis is placed on learning to control oneself, and to use methods which do the least practical harm (ideally, no unrecoverable injury) to an attacker.

It might also help if you explained more about why you're looking for something like this...

To avoid getting into trouble with the law.

 

[Joab]

Hello, Verbal training? ....maybe JUDO?

If you throw a guy on concrete he wil likely break bones and perhaps die.

Guns.....stops lots of people....and you don't have to shoot them too...study this further....but you have to be prepared to shoot once you draw.
Good point,

Humane self-defense? .....using power of langauges...proper wording!
------------------------------------
The "power" of LOVE? ....um?
------------------------------------

...having a army behind you....facing one person....works! most likely the one person will not attack?
-------------------------------------
Tazers? ..pepper sprays?
-----------------------------------
Having a "killer instincts" and the other person see it!
---------------------------------
USA- has nuclear bombs....and most other nations...will not attack...
NON-use of weapons is a humane self-defense....
---------------------------------
STUDY- joints locks....most likey what you are looking for....

Aloha, lock the joints...locks the attacker, locks of luck!!!

You've got some god points, thanks for your post.

 

[Joab]

I agree with these posts, but the first thing that comes to my mind is Aikido.

The question than is does Aikido work? Some would say yes, others no.

 

[Joab]

Well, there isn't any.
It is the person using it who decides whether the other guy ends up in the hospital. Take aikido for example. You can use it in many different ways. Depending on how you use it, you can either inflict pain with the goal of submitting you opponent, or you just break whatever appendage you manage to grab.

That's what I have been taught, there isn't any. But, trying to be open minded, I thought I would throw the question out and see if there are any.

 

[Joab]

I have been doing this for a while and I have never done serious injury to anyone using defensive tactics (LEO) and I cannot think of anyone else on my department or anyone from the County (the Deputies) having done so either.

We use our own system and the County uses Krav Maga both are very practical, take only about 40 hrs to get the core of it and mostly about control although the Krav stuff seems a little more ...."violent?"

I've taken Krav Maga, your likely going to hurt somebody using it.

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

Are there self defense systems that are practical (ie-they work) and normally do not seriously injure an attacker? If so what are they? Are they the future of self defense and the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Of course I can already hear one question coming: What constitutes "serious injury" to an attacker? Well, I would say an injury that puts one in the hospital, say a broken bone, busted knee, a jaw that needs to be wired shut, and the like. Not seriously injured would be a bruise, soreness, and the like.

The tools are available in every martial art it is up to the practicer to determine what degree of injury to inflict. Aikido looks peaceful until you throw someone into a wall. One would think Bagua was very peaceful because we have no fist strikes we use only the palm. Until you see the palm can cause internal bleeding,blindness from poked in the eye,a palm strike to break someones nose. Judo throws such as Tomoe nage(wheel throw) can have quite an impact on someone who does not know breakfalls. Sadly in the situtations of life and death surivial you might have to perform a broken bone,busted knee and so on but it is entirely up to you the amount of injury to inflict and if you choose to help the injured person or not.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

To avoid getting into trouble with the law.

The laws regarding personal self-defense are generally not involved with the amount or degree of injury done to the attacker by the victim. There is a common but mistaken perception that a victim is required to apply the least amount of force necessary to end an attack. I am not a lawyer, but in my experience, this is simply not true. They must stop applying violence when the danger to themselves has ended, but that is not the same as limiting the degree of violence they use.

What the law is interested in is when a person may engage in self-defense, and more specifically, when a person may defend themselves with deadly force. If the conditions are met, then the self-defense is lawful, and the degree of injury experienced by the attacker is not a consideration.

When the 'degree of injury' might come to the fore is if a victim were to find himself or herself sued by an attacker, so one might think of that as a consideration; but I would not. Self-defense is perforce an immediate and urgent need. I would not want to hamstring myself by attempting to limit my response to that which would likely do the least damage to the attacker.

Police officers also need to consider the degree of force applied, but they operate under different rules. They are expected to use only that force which is required to secure an apprehension or to defend themselves. They are expected to have training and the ability to choose less lethal responses from among a variety of options.

For the citizen, the concerns are 'am I authorized to defend myself' and 'may I use deadly force in this case'?

Having said that, I still believe that analysis of a situation in a SD situation is important, and 'running away' is a valid response if it is safe to do so.

I can understand anyone desire to protect themselves but to avoid unnecessary injury to anyone, even an attacker. Like others, the first thing that came to my mind was Aikido. Also like others, I agree that it is down to the way it is used (degree of skill and intent of the practitioner) as to whether or not it will be especially non-injurious to the attacker.

Unfortunately, I do not subscribe to the school of thought that gives concern to the well-being of the attacker in a self-defense situation. I am primarily concerned with my own well-being, placing that above the well-being of anyone who attacks me. I am also concerned with not running afoul of the law, and I will absolutely turn tail and run or drive away or whatever else I can do to escape if I can reasonably do so to avoid being attacked. I'll even turn over my wallet and possessions if I feel that it will keep me from being killed or seriously injured. However, if I feel that I cannot retreat, and if I feel that turning over my possessions is still likely to get me killed or seriously injured, then I am going to defend myself with everything I have, and if the attacker gets seriously injured, I figure that's their karma, not mine. I'm not trying to kill them, but if they get dead, oh well.

 

[jks9199]

To avoid getting into trouble with the law.

Then what you need isn't a particular style -- it's particular knowledge.

The laws of self-defense are a little complicated, and worthy of study by any martial artist. Even a technique that doesn't do "serious injury" can be excessive and unjustified... while lethal force can, depending on the specific circumstances be acceptable and justified use of force.

 

[MJS]

Are there self defense systems that are practical (ie-they work) and normally do not seriously injure an attacker? If so what are they? Are they the future of self defense and the only way to go when defending yourself while at the same time keeping you out of jail and/or civil liability?

Of course I can already hear one question coming: What constitutes "serious injury" to an attacker? Well, I would say an injury that puts one in the hospital, say a broken bone, busted knee, a jaw that needs to be wired shut, and the like. Not seriously injured would be a bruise, soreness, and the like.

This is, IMHO, one of the goals of the martial arts. We should reach a point, when we can control what we do, how we do it, etc. I mean think about it.....this is why I cringe when I hear people talking about the supposed "one shot one kill, deadly techniques, like biting and eye gouging" Sure those are all fine and good and they do work, but IMO, if thats what the person needs to do to always win, then that person needs to re-evaluate their training.

So yes, to answer your question, any art out there can do this, but it all depends on the person doing the art.

 

[Decker]

I agree with what was earlier said by K831, that "Any attacker you can stop by giving a bruise was probably not a real threat in the first place".
An angry guy who just happened to vent on you, and whom you managed to talk into calming down, isn't really a threat.
A criminal, say, threatening you with a knife to your throat and demanding your valuables, is a threat, considering you either stop him with your valuables (which I'm pretty sure are worth much more than a bruise, or a few) or an incapacitating technique.

Actually my first thought on seeing "non-injurious self defense" was that it would constitute either verbal de-escalation (not always successful or applicable), complete avoidance of potentially dangerous scenarios (impossible), escape (again not always successful or applicable) or a skill difference between the defender and attacker sufficient for a "serious injury"-free conflict resolution (really difficult, not always possible).

I suppose the amount of danger (read: potential for physical harm to be inflicted upon you) you're in would often be proportionate to the amount of physical harm required to be inflicted on the attacker for him to stop, barring abovementioned skill differences, escape routes, and Force powers at the Mind Trick level.

 

[still learning]

Hello, If there was a humane Self-defense art that works 100% of the time?

Martial arts today..would be doing it! ..the police...armies of the world...

...when you come down to it? ....it is NOT the form of self-defense ...it is the people you will be facing!

...and some people...can be HANDLE W/ humane self-defense? ....others you may need to be more aggressive to suvive and live another day...

...there is NO SIMPLE ANSWERS ....there is simple techniques.

Aloha, 911 works

 

[zDom]

Regarding the mention of a gun:

My understanding is that you should NEVER draw a gun thinking that showing the aggressor a gun will end the conflict.

Nor should you ever "shoot to wound."

If you produce a firearm for self defense, you must only do so with the knowledge that, by shooting center body mass to stop the threat, you very well may end up shooting the aggressor dead.

Drawing a gun to wave like a Magic Wand of Don't Attack Me is a BAD idea.