Truth of self defense and scrutiny
- Thread starter Juany118
- Start date
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Yeah sort of.
You should have a flexible and solid enough skill set to create some sort of control the situation you are in. When you add skill sets they really should compliment each other.
Ironically that dudes knife is a perfect metaphor.
So he has this fox karambit that is a specific self defence knife. And does all sorts of amazing stuff. But the liner lock is dodgy. And so the knife itself is not constructed well enough to take advantage of all the amazing features.
A well constructed knife that does its own job well. Does a better job than the specific purpose built tool.
Same with martial arts.
You should have a flexible and solid enough skill set to create some sort of control the situation you are in. When you add skill sets they really should compliment each other.
Ironically that dudes knife is a perfect metaphor.
So he has this fox karambit that is a specific self defence knife. And does all sorts of amazing stuff. But the liner lock is dodgy. And so the knife itself is not constructed well enough to take advantage of all the amazing features.
A well constructed knife that does its own job well. Does a better job than the specific purpose built tool.
Same with martial arts.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Even if the knife is a metaphor?
KangTsai
2nd Black Belt
Doesn't the statement still stand its point?
Agreed. Functionality is paramount. I'd rather be well-trained in boxing (clearly a more limited art, as it is practiced today) than poorly trained in NGA, Krav Maga, or anything else that is built for self-defense and has more areas of coverage.
OP
OP
Juany118
Senior Master
I was more referring to the fact that there are different types of Combative training and that training a civilian in self defense using Military tactics isn't the best thing. Also to use caution because the assumption is often made that if you know Martial Arts you also understand self defense law, which is not always the case. Regardless, the minute you have specialized training, if you find yourself in a self defense situation, you will be under more scrutiny than the average person. Unless for some reason that link is showing a different video?
The title of the video I intended to link is...
"When you use your skills, even for lawful defensive reasons, your martial arts training will likely be scrutinized and potentially used against you. Doug offers some advice."
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
As for the Fox knives, the CT corrects the problem (as other liner locks have) with a manually activated top lock.
The title of the video I intended to link is...
"When you use your skills, even for lawful defensive reasons, your martial arts training will likely be scrutinized and potentially used against you. Doug offers some advice."
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
As for the Fox knives, the CT corrects the problem (as other liner locks have) with a manually activated top lock.
Last edited:
I meant to reply to this intent of the video earlier, and coffee decided I needed to be in the kitchen.
This is an important distinction (different audence = different teaching). My first instructor in NGA has taught Defensive Tactics at the police academy in each of the three states he has lived in since I met him. While he teaches NGA principles there, what he teaches is very different from what he teaches to civilians in a similar time setting. When he has a LEO join one of his classes, he often pulls them out and teaches some specialized movements (for cuffing, etc.) that the rest of the class doesn't need. I also remember seeing him discuss use-of-force policy with them (as opposed to the use-of-force law) as it applies to some of what he teaches.
OP
OP
Juany118
Senior Master
The point he is trying to make is training methodology as it relates to liability. Lets say you use a technique that seriously injures someone. Your training then can be a point of cross examination. If your training was focused on a Military Application it increases your exposure. Yes you can argue that your use of the techniques was not those intended to kill/maim someone but the fact it was Military training puts you in a bad spot in the eyes of a Jury.
Also, any MA creates muscle memory. This can be VERY hard to override in a "fight or flight" situation, heck the entire point of the training is so that you simply "act" in such situations. So if you are trained to "finish" someone once you get them on the ground with a throat shot, as an example, you can find yourself performing that action without even thinking, you simply "act" as you were trained. In essence the axiom "train like you fight" can help you, or hurt you, in a Court Room.
KangTsai
2nd Black Belt
It takes a lot of power to not kill a man trying to kill you.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Not if they are crap at fighting.
KangTsai
2nd Black Belt
True. You could just walk away.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Or sit on them. Which I have done to a few killy magoo,s Which is the fun thing about pinning a guy. It doesnt matter what they want to do. They still cant do it.
oftheherd1
Senior Master
As talked about in another thread, I think that is trainable. But you are correct that excitement and fear of the moment might over ride a desire to stop an opponent without killing them. Or you may believe that result is the only way to live yourself. If you find yourself in court, you need a lawyer that can ask the right questions, so that you can articulate an answer that makes sense to a jury. A martial arts expert testifying on your side can help, but read what Juany118 has said about that.
oftheherd1
Senior Master
That's true, but how long may it take you to figure that out?
If the attacker allows it.
That depends how bad they are. If they are really bad (sloppy drunk, for instance) that's a quick read. If they aren't that bad, it's a matter of how easily you control them. So, if some magoo has caused Drop Bear to step in and take action, if DB's first move takes the guy completely by surprise (not trained/prepared) and gets him completely under control (not able to resist at all), then there's a huge gap in skill level. If DB feels effective resistance or the other guy puts up a decent defense, it's a different game, altogether.
OP
OP
Juany118
Senior Master
But that kind misses the point made. If you can articulate someone is trying to kill you, you are legally justified in killing them. Most self defense scenarios do not involve assailants bent on homicide though.
This is why I only teach "likely lethal" finishes on a rare basis. They should know them (just in case), but we don't want those ingrained. I cringe when I watch "self-defense" styles teach people to throw, then chop or punch to the hyoid bone.
OP
OP
Juany118
Senior Master
Yeah my instructor largely does the same. Part so people know the techniques but also because he has had some younger students who love to experiment figure them out on their own and he wants to make the context in which the techniques are legally permissible clear.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Training to gain skills so that I don't have to go into kill mode every time I engage in conflict is one of the aims of learning martial arts.
I don't want to cripple people. That is just being crap.
