The Fear Of Defending Yourself.

[MJS]

Something to do after work or school, a way to make new friends, exercise, self defense, inner peace, self control, self confidence.....all valid reasons why people train in the martial arts. Depending on the school you go to and the students there, you may dive into legal aspects of the use of your skills. We learn a wide assortment of defenses against a wide variety of attacks. You name it, and its probably covered....weapon defense, punch, kick and grab defense, defense against a grappler...the list is endless.

After reading a recent thread on an armed robbery, the question came up of defending yourself and not always complying with the attacker. Now of course, its also preached that we should talk our way out of a confrontation, to be cautious of what we do, because we may face a lawsuit. So, this brings up the question and purpose of this thread....Why are people afraid to defend themselves?

Of course, the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight. We assume that we won't get shot or stabbed if we hand over the keys and car, our cash, watch, rings, etc. Of course, for every 'success' story out there, there are probably ones which result in the complying person getting injured anyways.

Now, I'm certainly not hinting that we should abuse what it taught to us, but if someone was to attack you, why turn the other cheek instead of defending yourself? So again, the question comes up....why are people afraid to defend themselves?

 

[KempoGuy06]

Something to do after work or school, a way to make new friends, exercise, self defense, inner peace, self control, self confidence.....all valid reasons why people train in the martial arts. Depending on the school you go to and the students there, you may dive into legal aspects of the use of your skills. We learn a wide assortment of defenses against a wide variety of attacks. You name it, and its probably covered....weapon defense, punch, kick and grab defense, defense against a grappler...the list is endless.

After reading a recent thread on an armed robbery, the question came up of defending yourself and not always complying with the attacker. Now of course, its also preached that we should talk our way out of a confrontation, to be cautious of what we do, because we may face a lawsuit. So, this brings up the question and purpose of this thread....Why are people afraid to defend themselves?

Of course, the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight. We assume that we won't get shot or stabbed if we hand over the keys and car, our cash, watch, rings, etc. Of course, for every 'success' story out there, there are probably ones which result in the complying person getting injured anyways.

Now, I'm certainly not hinting that we should abuse what it taught to us, but if someone was to attack you, why turn the other cheek instead of defending yourself? So again, the question comes up....why are people afraid to defend themselves?

I believe one of the main reasons is the legal aspect. while we know what we know we, however, do not know what will happen should we need to use it. Its sad to say but the world is a pretty messed up place and the legal system is as well.

However, i believe another reason why people might be afraid is because they are afraid of what they might end up having to do and do not think that they can cope with that. What I mean is, say a woman gets mugged and she hold whatever rank in whatever art. she immobilizes her attacker by striking him to the groin, eyes or throat. she later finds out that the man has permanent damage to that area. She then because depressed and ashamed of what she has done to another person. (does this make sense?)

what do you think of that idea MJS?

B

 

[stickarts]

Even when I defended myself and hurt the other person when there seemed no other way out, I never felt good about it. For me, it's more an ethical problem than legal. Also, you may win the fight today, and then they may come back after you with a vengeance tomorrow. Violence, even when it seems justified, just doesn't lead to good things. I think it is a last resort when there is no other way out and even then there are repercussions to your actions.

 

[searcher]

Something to do after work or school, a way to make new friends, exercise, self defense, inner peace, self control, self confidence.....all valid reasons why people train in the martial arts. Depending on the school you go to and the students there, you may dive into legal aspects of the use of your skills. We learn a wide assortment of defenses against a wide variety of attacks. You name it, and its probably covered....weapon defense, punch, kick and grab defense, defense against a grappler...the list is endless.

After reading a recent thread on an armed robbery, the question came up of defending yourself and not always complying with the attacker. Now of course, its also preached that we should talk our way out of a confrontation, to be cautious of what we do, because we may face a lawsuit. So, this brings up the question and purpose of this thread....Why are people afraid to defend themselves?

Of course, the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight. We assume that we won't get shot or stabbed if we hand over the keys and car, our cash, watch, rings, etc. Of course, for every 'success' story out there, there are probably ones which result in the complying person getting injured anyways.

Now, I'm certainly not hinting that we should abuse what it taught to us, but if someone was to attack you, why turn the other cheek instead of defending yourself? So again, the question comes up....why are people afraid to defend themselves?

There is one huge reason why i try to turn the other cheek. Here in the State of KS, if you are CCH and you engage in ANY physical altercation, it is considered an armed conflict. This is regardless of whether or not you draw your firearm. If it comes to the point where I have to defend myself, 9 out of 10 times, someone is going to get shot. Not really high on my list of things to do.

 

[Kacey]

People are afraid to defend themselves for as many reasons are there are people - but in general, I would think it comes down to one, or a combination, of several things:
- many people, even when threatened, are afraid to hurt other people
- many people freeze in emergencies
- many people are so afraid to be hurt that they do whatever an attacker says
- no matter how much you train, it's different when it's real

 

[tshadowchaser]

I have to agree that possible lawsuits and the fear of legal action (being prosecuted for hurting someone) are the main reasons .
Now I have to say this:
Anyone trying to hurt me, my family, or someone who obviously can not defend themselves will find out I could care less about those reasons named above. If you think I studied all this time and will not defend myself or my loved ones you have got to be kidding. I'll deal with what happens after I defend myself

 

[MJS]

I believe one of the main reasons is the legal aspect. while we know what we know we, however, do not know what will happen should we need to use it. Its sad to say but the world is a pretty messed up place and the legal system is as well.

However, i believe another reason why people might be afraid is because they are afraid of what they might end up having to do and do not think that they can cope with that. What I mean is, say a woman gets mugged and she hold whatever rank in whatever art. she immobilizes her attacker by striking him to the groin, eyes or throat. she later finds out that the man has permanent damage to that area. She then because depressed and ashamed of what she has done to another person. (does this make sense?)

what do you think of that idea MJS?

B

I was going to reply to each paragraph seperately, however, what I'm about to say, applies to both. First, I agree with you. The system is a bit messed up, unfortunately. Of course, this is why I personally feel, that in addition to eveyrthing thats offered to instructors in most schools, ie: black belt workouts, advanced material, how to teach better classes, etc., someone with a strong legal background should be consulted. IMHO, it'd be worth bringing in a lawyer to talk about legal issues. That was the insts. of the school will have a better understanding, and that could be passed onto the students.

As for the rest...I suppose we should ask ourselves, why train then? I'm of the belief that if someone chooses to attempt an attack on someone, the bad guy gets what he deserves.

Now, I'm sure the thought of doing something violent (insert technique of choice) may gross people out, however, IMHO, if its a matter of life or death, or a matter or getting seriously injured or walking away with minor injury, I'd choose the last one. If the bad guy is going to sue me because after repeated attempts on my part to get away, verbally defuse something, etc., then I guess I'll have to take my chances with the court.

 

[MJS]

Even when I defended myself and hurt the other person when there seemed no other way out, I never felt good about it. For me, it's more an ethical problem than legal. Also, you may win the fight today, and then they may come back after you with a vengeance tomorrow. Violence, even when it seems justified, just doesn't lead to good things. I think it is a last resort when there is no other way out and even then there are repercussions to your actions.

Good points. I suppose this is where you have to draw the line between leaving and hoping that nobody saw what happened, or staying, calling the police and go from there.

A while ago, I linked an article about a shooting in Ca. Guy was attacked by some gang members, a struggle over the gun, and the gangmember got shot with his own gun. Guy stayed, called the police, etc. Never heard anything else, so I have no idea if there were any charges, etc.

 

[MJS]

There is one huge reason why i try to turn the other cheek. Here in the State of KS, if you are CCH and you engage in ANY physical altercation, it is considered an armed conflict. This is regardless of whether or not you draw your firearm. If it comes to the point where I have to defend myself, 9 out of 10 times, someone is going to get shot. Not really high on my list of things to do.

This is why I personally don't carry. I'd rather take my chances without a gun.

 

[MJS]

I have to agree that possible lawsuits and the fear of legal action (being prosecuted for hurting someone) are the main reasons .
Now I have to say this:
Anyone trying to hurt me, my family, or someone who obviously can not defend themselves will find out I could care less about those reasons named above. If you think I studied all this time and will not defend myself or my loved ones you have got to be kidding. I'll deal with what happens after I defend myself

My thoughts exactly!

 

[Joab]

Well, as my self defense guru (who perhaps doesn't want his name on the internet and qouted) taught me and many others who will remain anonymous, don't react to the attack itself so much as a way to defend yourself against it, but rather attack the attacker! in others words, take the offense when your attacked, be not not concerned so much with blocks and parrys and the like but attack him with everything you have. Take the offensive, don't be defensive, in other words.

There are a number of reasons to not want to defend yourself, most notably the legal aspect. And one should never defend himself unless he is actually attacked. We should of course try to talk our way out of it and run if at all possible, but when attacked with no other option you need to stop the attacker by any means necessary. Not use excessive use of force, but only the amount necessary to stop the attack, and never deadly use of force unless the attacker is trying to kill you and there is no other option.

Turning the other cheek, as taught by Jesus Christ, was merely responding to a personal insult, not a physical attack. It would be similiar to spitting on someone in American culture, difficult to take, but not an actual physical attack, or so I have always been taught was the meaning in the culture of Jesus day.

Now, to prevent feeling bad about counter attacking, firstly only counter attack if running away is not an option. A way to prevent post traumatic stress disorder as taught to me and the rest of the class is to dehumanize the attacker. There is no post traumatic stress disorder from swatting a mosquito, think of the attacker as a mosquito.

I hope this helps someone mulling this question over.

 

[searcher]

This is why I personally don't carry. I'd rather take my chances without a gun.

Until the time comes that the BGs have guns and you are wishing you did. There is nothing that is a force multiplier like a firearm.

 

[MJS]

Until the time comes that the BGs have guns and you are wishing you did. There is nothing that is a force multiplier like a firearm.

Good point. Of course, being able to access it and use it, without taking a hit from the bg's first is another story. I don't want to sound like a gun is a poor choice of a weapon to have, but it may not be the saving grace that we intend it to be.

 

[KenpoTex]

So, this brings up the question and purpose of this thread....Why are people afraid to defend themselves?

Of course, the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight. We assume that we won't get shot or stabbed if we hand over the keys and car, our cash, watch, rings, etc. Of course, for every 'success' story out there, there are probably ones which result in the complying person getting injured anyways.

Now, I'm certainly not hinting that we should abuse what it taught to us, but if someone was to attack you, why turn the other cheek instead of defending yourself? So again, the question comes up....why are people afraid to defend themselves?

I think there are several reasons, some of which have already been mentioned.

• Conditioning: we are constantly bombarded with the idea that "violence is never the answer." We are told that it is better to just give in and not respond to violence with violence. We have created a "sheep mentality" where violence for any reason is bad. Look at schools with their zero-tolerance policies for example...
  You even made the statement that: "the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight." My question is, is this really true? Why does that make you "the winner?" Is there some sort of moral or ethical superiority in not using force against an assailant?
  I don't personally believe this to be the case, not using force just for the sake of not using force does not confer some sort of honorable status upon the "victim." Obviously there will be cases where an analysis of your abilities, the totality of circumstances, and the demeanor and behavior of the BG may dictate a certain level of response, or lack of response. However, I don't think not acting should be the goal just for its own sake.

• Fear of legal reprisals: Our system is a mess, the burden of proof in a situation where you have had to use force to protect yourself rests squarely on you. Thankfully some states have started to reverse this by passing castle-doctrine and "stand your ground" laws. However, there is still a justifiable fear that we may be punished more than the very person we were defending against.

• Lack of resolve: There are many "martial-artists" and people in general who don't have the proper mindset. They are hesitant to respond with a level of violence that will bring a decisive end to the attack (deadly force). I think this really ties in to my first point about how we have been conditioned to abhor using force. If it's hard for us to do anything, it's going to be much harder for us to be nasty if that's what's called for.

just my $0.02

 

[Joab]

I think there are several reasons, some of which have already been mentioned.

• Conditioning: we are constantly bombarded with the idea that "violence is never the answer." We are told that it is better to just give in and not respond to violence with violence. We have created a "sheep mentality" where violence for any reason is bad. Look at schools with their zero-tolerance policies for example...

Joab: Couldn't agree more.

• 
  You even made the statement that: "the common sense thing is to try to talk your way out, because in the end, you are the real winner, because you didn't have to fight." My question is, is this really true? Why does that make you "the winner?" Is there some sort of moral or ethical superiority in not using force against an assailant?
  I don't personally believe this to be the case, not using force just for the sake of not using force does not confer some sort of honorable status upon the "victim." Obviously there will be cases where an analysis of your abilities, the totality of circumstances, and the demeanor and behavior of the BG may dictate a certain level of response, or lack of response. However, I don't think not acting should be the goal just for its own sake.

Joab: There are a number of reasons to try to avoid the use of force, most importantly legal. Legally you can not resort to force unless you are attacked physically, you can not use physical force in response to any verbal words coming out of the mouth of an uncouth fellow, retaliate with physical force and you will likely get in a heap of trouble with the law.

• Fear of legal reprisals: Our system is a mess, the burden of proof in a situation where you have had to use force to protect yourself rests squarely on you. Thankfully some states have started to reverse this by passing castle-doctrine and "stand your ground" laws. However, there is still a justifiable fear that we may be punished more than the very person we were defending against.

Joab: "Stand your ground" and "defend your castle" always as far as I know refers to defending your home against an intruder. This is nothing new, it goes back to English Common law, centuries ago. Normally you can do whatever you want against an intruder in your home, but consult your local laws with a lawyer.

• Lack of resolve: There are many "martial-artists" and people in general who don't have the proper mindset. They are hesitant to respond with a level of violence that will bring a decisive end to the attack (deadly force). I think this really ties in to my first point about how we have been conditioned to abhor using force. If it's hard for us to do anything, it's going to be much harder for us to be nasty if that's what's called for.

Joab: That's definitely true, and the proper combat mindset is sadly neglected in many martial arts school. Dealy force should only be used against a deadly attack and when there is no other option, the use of deadly force otherwise will land you in prison for a long time most likely, in all 50 states.


just my $0.02

Joab: Just my $.02 as well.

 

[KenpoTex]

There are a number of reasons to try to avoid the use of force, most importantly legal. Legally you can not resort to force unless you are attacked physically, you can not use physical force in response to any verbal words coming out of the mouth of an uncouth fellow, retaliate with physical force and you will likely get in a heap of trouble with the law.

I never meant to imply that there are not times when using force is not appropriate. My comments were directed at the idea that even when force is justified (morally or legally) we should seek to avoid it just for the sake of avoiding it.

"Stand your ground" and "defend your castle" always as far as I know refers to defending your home against an intruder. This is nothing new, it goes back to English Common law, centuries ago. Normally you can do whatever you want against an intruder in your home, but consult your local laws with a lawyer.

I'm familiar with the origins of the law but I believe some states still impose a "duty to retreat" when in the home. The states that have passes formal "castle doctrine" laws (Florida, Texas, and Missouri just to name a few) have made sure it's guarenteed that you can fight to defend your home without any idiotic requirements to retreat or deescalate.
The "stand your ground" laws that I'm referring to are the ones like in Florida where you don't have a duty to retreat "from any place where you are legally allowed to be"

 

[Joab]

In Florida you don't have to retreat from any place you can legally be eh? Interesting, its the first I have heard of such a law. I agree with it, I merely only know that in general you have to retreat outside your home if it is possible, legally speaking. Way to go Florida if that is indeed the case, and thanks for letting me know about that.

 

[KempoGuy06]

As for the rest...I suppose we should ask ourselves, why train then? I'm of the belief that if someone chooses to attempt an attack on someone, the bad guy gets what he deserves.

Now, I'm sure the thought of doing something violent (insert technique of choice) may gross people out, however, IMHO, if its a matter of life or death, or a matter or getting seriously injured or walking away with minor injury, I'd choose the last one. If the bad guy is going to sue me because after repeated attempts on my part to get away, verbally defuse something, etc., then I guess I'll have to take my chances with the court.

what is the saying....I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by 6

B

 

[stickarts]

Good points. I suppose this is where you have to draw the line between leaving and hoping that nobody saw what happened, or staying, calling the police and go from there.

A while ago, I linked an article about a shooting in Ca. Guy was attacked by some gang members, a struggle over the gun, and the gangmember got shot with his own gun. Guy stayed, called the police, etc. Never heard anything else, so I have no idea if there were any charges, etc.

I absolutely believe everyone has the right to defend themselves and I wouldn't hesitate if there were no other choice. The attacker may certainly deserve it. I would rather just try to be the better person. It's true though that sometimes you don't have much of an option. Once I was standing waiting for a friend and someone attacked me. To this day I don't know why. It seemed he just felt like hurting someone. He didn't want anything from me or ask for anything. He just came up and started swinging. Fortunately I evaded the attack and subdued him. Some people just seem crazy and you have to defend yourself. Its all about survival.

 

[searcher]

what is the saying....I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by 6

B

Absolutely!!! That is why I am glad we have the Castle Doctrine here in KS.