# Do You Know When to Stop?



## MartialIntent (Jul 5, 2006)

So theres _never_ a time to surrender or to give up when defending ourselves, I think I could get a faithful _amen_ on that. But how do you know when to stop when youre coming out *on top*? How do you know when youve given it enough?

Youve got the better of your attacker  stopping too late may be seen [later on down the line] as you having used excessive or disproportional force in your defense, transforming it into an actual attack. But stopping too soon - or at least when you believe its safe to do so - may not be the resolution to the conflict but rather the metaphorical bell for your attacker to go to his corner and have his seconds tend him. Furthermore, youll have lost that previous advantage upon any reinitiation.

I saw this latter situation at the weekend: the defender released his pin and the aggressor got up and backed away, gesturing submissively with hands up in front of him. Seconds later he was back again with a bottle in his hand [all lager fueled yeah I know]. What do you think? Your training has worked and youve gained the upper hand. How do you know when to stop? When your attacker isnt fighting back or when your attacker isnt moving? Isnt breathing?

Respects!


----------



## JBrainard (Jul 5, 2006)

You stop when your attacker isnt moving. It's the only way to be sure. On the flip side, you need to check your local laws on self-defence. You don't want the dumb **** to sue you.


----------



## Bigshadow (Jul 5, 2006)

Subdue them until authorities arrive.  If that won't work, incapacitate them until authorities arrive.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jul 5, 2006)

Before I read the Thomas Covenant series and the "Oath of Peace" (see my sig below)... I always stopped when they stopped trying to get back up or stopped fighting (swinging/grabbing and kicking). Imagine the quiet thrill I got when I found a quote that articulated my fighting philosophy. 
I never was one to subscribe to "beating them til *I *felt good or got it all out of my system". That's barbaric and pointless IMO. Since I'm not one to "start" fights (anymore) I'm going to fight my antagonist/attacker/opponent until they can't make the attempt to hurt me anymore and I can get away from them... by walking or running.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 5, 2006)

as soon as you get the chance to get the hell out of Dodge City, do it.  This is self-defense, not a "match" where you want to stick around and duke it out and prove who is best.   Subduing the opponent until the police arrive is a nice idea, but shouldn't be the goal because by doing so you are taking a big risk by simply staying in the area.  The guy might have lots of friends looking to get involved, or the guy might get away from you and turn the tables.

So I say, as soon as you get a chance, run.  You may have injured your attacker already, or not, but it doesn't matter.  If you think you can get away, do it.  That's when it's time to stop.  If he chases you and you can't run fast enough then you have to re-engage and take it to a higher level, but that should only be Plan B.


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 5, 2006)

MA-Caver said:
			
		

> I never was one to subscribe to "beating them til *I *felt good or got it all out of my system". That's barbaric and pointless IMO.


MA-C,
I agree with your points. This one above you made I think is fairly central to the integrity of most of what we've trained for - ie. to defend and not to attack which is what happens when we cross over into trying to get something "out of the system". Of course, if you've been in such a situation you'll undoubtedly know there's an instinct [a not very PC one] in most of us to continue the beating because someone has dared to attack us and this is regardless of our logic and sense telling us it's time to stop. Do you think continuing in anger or vindictiveness when we _should_ stop is just a lack of self-control? What level of self-control should we aim for in this situation?

Respects!


----------



## Bigshadow (Jul 5, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Subduing the opponent until the police arrive is a nice idea, but shouldn't be the goal because by doing so you are taking a big risk by simply staying in the area.  The guy might have lots of friends looking to get involved, or the guy might get away from you and turn the tables.


Actually, getting away is the first.  I suppose I had the beer bottle incident in my head.  But yes, stopping at the point where I can safely get away, IS the point.

Thanks for the reminder.


----------



## Bigshadow (Jul 5, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Do you think continuing in anger or vindictiveness when we _should_ stop is just a lack of self-control?


Yes, clearly out of control.



			
				MartialIntent said:
			
		

> What level of self-control should we aim for in this situation?


No mind.


----------



## MJS (Jul 5, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> So theres _never_ a time to surrender or to give up when defending ourselves, I think I could get a faithful _amen_ on that. But how do you know when to stop when youre coming out *on top*? How do you know when youve given it enough?
> 
> Youve got the better of your attacker  stopping too late may be seen [later on down the line] as you having used excessive or disproportional force in your defense, transforming it into an actual attack. But stopping too soon - or at least when you believe its safe to do so - may not be the resolution to the conflict but rather the metaphorical bell for your attacker to go to his corner and have his seconds tend him. Furthermore, youll have lost that previous advantage upon any reinitiation.
> 
> ...


 
I think that this is where having knowledge of the SD laws in your state will come in handy.  Going all out could land us in more trouble than we originally had, and not going far enough could result in us having the person engage us again.  I agree with FC..as soon as the avenue of escape presents itself, take it!  I'd think that if they make an attempt to re-engage us, we'd be justified in taking our force to that next level.  

Of course, taking into consideration mult. attackers, the possibility of a weapon, your location, time of day, etc. would also come into play during your defense.

Great thread! 

Mike


----------



## MA-Caver (Jul 5, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> MA-C,
> I agree with your points. This one above you made I think is fairly central to the integrity of most of what we've trained for - ie. to defend and not to attack which is what happens when we cross over into trying to get something "out of the system". Of course, if you've been in such a situation you'll undoubtedly know there's an instinct [a not very PC one] in most of us to continue the beating because someone has dared to attack us and this is regardless of our logic and sense telling us it's time to stop. Do you think continuing in anger or vindictiveness when we _should_ stop is just a lack of self-control? What level of self-control should we aim for in this situation?
> 
> Respects!


IMO it is just simply that... a lack of self-control over your anger. Yes, it is appalling that someone would choose YOU to do whatever mis-deed they had in mind, and in my personal experience(s) my initial emotional response(s) has usually been anger more than fear, though both were present. If/When I have gained the upper hand I have been guilty of a "couple" of kicks above and beyond to the guy that's laying on the ground because (kick with each syllable) "he-just-pissed-me-off!"  That was just instinct, and anger venting out. But now I feel that even instinct can be controlled/contained/ignored. 
Now that I'm older, wiser (???) I feel that we (as Martialists) _should_ add training of ourselves to control our base emotions so that we will be in better control of our minds and our bodies when it comes time to react to a threat. 
Being able to take down an attacker more effectively than the average person lays upon our shoulders a responsibility to ourselves to maintain the discipline and control that is essential to the techniques applied and to control the "knee jerk" reaction of our emotional adrenalin dump when we are faced with a harmful situation.
It does sound easier said than done I'll admit, but it CAN be done. The energy created by these powerful emotions can likewise be helpful if channelled properly.


----------



## Flatlander (Jul 5, 2006)

I have made the error of not stopping soon enough.  It's a truely awful feeling; one that I wish upon nobody.  Sadly, my personal safety was in no great danger at the onset of the altercation.

It is difficult to guage at what point one's attacker is sufficiently subdued to ensure one's own safety.  It is tremendously more difficult to control one's emotions in the moment of raging, violent anger.  

In response to the question, no.  I do not know when to stop.


----------



## Cryozombie (Jul 5, 2006)

I dont think you can say "I stop at point A, B or C" because every encounter is different.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 5, 2006)

Technopunk said:
			
		

> I dont think you can say "I stop at point A, B or C" because every encounter is different.



With multiple variable inputs.

How many people? 

Weapons and what are they?

Is the guy on the ground and still stating he is going to kill/hurt you?

To just name a small few.


----------



## Ivan86 (Jul 5, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> With multiple variable inputs.
> 
> How many people?
> 
> ...


Agreed. It all depends on the situation.

If there's multiple attackers, you might need to seriously injure some of them to take them out of the fight and make it easier to deal with.

If the guy's on the ground and reaching for the knife he dropped when you tore him down ...

And so on.


----------



## Explorer (Jul 5, 2006)

We teach that force is used to create an avenue for escape.  That is best accomplished when your attacker is incapacitated in some way ... in pain, unconcious or broken.

If you stick around the bad guys friends WILL come to his aid in one way or another.  They may come to his aid when you start winning.  It is extremely important to clear the danger zone as soon as possible and call the police to tell them what happened.  Bad guys have been known to call the cops when they find themselves on the losing side ...  as a last shot at you.


----------



## Shaolinwind (Jul 6, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> So theres _never_ a time to surrender or to give up when defending ourselves, I think I could get a faithful _amen_ on that. But how do you know when to stop when youre coming out *on top*? How do you know when youve given it enough?
> 
> Youve got the better of your attacker  stopping too late may be seen [later on down the line] as you having used excessive or disproportional force in your defense, transforming it into an actual attack. But stopping too soon - or at least when you believe its safe to do so - may not be the resolution to the conflict but rather the metaphorical bell for your attacker to go to his corner and have his seconds tend him. Furthermore, youll have lost that previous advantage upon any reinitiation.
> 
> ...


 
Well... If your opponent is on the ground and gesturing submissively, you can always swiftly leave.  And if you don't want to be arrested, that's probably still a good idea.


----------



## Shaolinwind (Jul 6, 2006)

Explorer said:
			
		

> Bad guys have been known to call the cops when they find themselves on the losing side ... as a last shot at you.


 
Agreed.. An assailant isn't usually interested in equity or justice.  They are interested in causing you any harm they can.


----------



## pstarr (Jul 6, 2006)

The problem arises when, in the heat of the fight, you begin to "think."  You begin to concern yourself with whether you should stop at this or that point and you can lose focus on what you're doing.

I'm not saying that you should beat the guy until he's little more than a wet spot on the pavement but it's not a good idea to "think", either.

When he's rendered incapable of continuing the fight, it's over...I think if you maintain an awareness of that concept you'll be okay.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jul 6, 2006)

When to stop?  when the attacker is incapable or obviously unwilling (i.e. running away) to continue his aggressive behavior.  For me, this is generally going to mean putting them on the ground (preferrably by rendering them unconscious) or breaking a bone or two.  Something that's damaging enough to give me the opportunity to escape SAFELY.


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 6, 2006)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I have made the error of not stopping soon enough. It's a truely awful feeling; one that I wish upon nobody. Sadly, my personal safety was in no great danger at the onset of the altercation.
> 
> It is difficult to guage at what point one's attacker is sufficiently subdued to ensure one's own safety. It is tremendously more difficult to control one's emotions in the moment of raging, violent anger.
> 
> In response to the question, no. I do not know when to stop.


Yeah, I think it's easy to theorize but I agree, when we're landed in an *actual* situation it's a little harder to hear that voice of reason saying "enough" when you feel such a clear and present danger to your own life.

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 6, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> With multiple variable inputs.
> 
> How many people?
> 
> ...


Would there be confrontations, when you find yourself having the advantage, that you would stop and quit?

Respects!


----------



## Dark (Jul 6, 2006)

kenpotex said:
			
		

> When to stop? when the attacker is incapable or obviously unwilling (i.e. running away) to continue his aggressive behavior. For me, this is generally going to mean putting them on the ground (preferrably by rendering them unconscious) or breaking a bone or two. Something that's damaging enough to give me the opportunity to escape SAFELY.


 
The fun comes when the little coward is pumped up a LSD and/or PCP and doesn't realise you've beaten him in a blood stain. The use of force is simply justified by the length they go through to harm you. Dead men have no side of the story nor can they retaliate later, but their families will always try to sue...


----------



## KenpoTex (Jul 6, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> The fun comes when the little coward is pumped up a LSD and/or PCP and doesn't realise you've beaten him in a blood stain. The use of force is simply justified by the length they go through to harm you. Dead men have no side of the story nor can they retaliate later, but their families will always try to sue...


you'll notice that while I said "render them unconscious,"  I didn't specify the length of time that they'd spend in that state.  For some attackers, a brachial-stun or palm-heel will produce the desired effect, for others you may need 4 or 5 rounds to the CNS to get the job done.  Of course, in the latter case, the state of unconsciousness will be pretty permanent.


----------



## stickarts (Jul 6, 2006)

I think my response would depend upon how serious i perceived their intent to be and who was involved.
If they are just a bully, this is a different situation then someone trying to maime or kill me.
Also, is my family involved? If my family is involved, it just got a lot more serious!
In general, i would not want a situation where if I were to let them go, it would be an equal situation again. 
There needs to be a follow up such as gaining assistance, leaving the dangerous scene, keeping them subdued, or causing enough damage so they are not capable of another assault.
I am definately focused on avoiding dangerous situations and minimizing harm to anyone as much as possible: this is just a "what if" scenario.


----------



## Kreth (Jul 6, 2006)

Dark said:
			
		

> Dead men have no side of the story nor can they retaliate later...


You've made this or a similar comment several times now. How many men have you killed, or are you not speaking from experience?


----------



## spinkick (Jul 6, 2006)

Well I would rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6 so if he keeps coming until one of us dies so be it


----------



## Drac (Jul 6, 2006)

For us in Law Enforcement we stop when the suspect/subject/ stops resisting long enough to put the cuffs on..As *DARK *posted 'The fun comes when the idiot you're dealing with is pumped up on PCP or has been smoking "wet" cigarettes..I agree with *spinkick* sentiments "I'd rather have an ugly trial than a beautiful funeral...


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jul 6, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Would there be confrontations, when you find yourself having the advantage, that you would stop and quit?
> 
> Respects!



Yes, and then I knocked them back down again when they got back up and swung again. 

Repeat process until their friend(s) stop them from swinging on you ar the police show up, or they decide to go home. 

Yes I had the advantage and knew it and only defended myself. There was no real threat until their swing was coming. 

Other times with multiple people I have hurt some real bad real fast so as to not worry about them (* Untill the ambulance took them away *) and I could move on to the next.


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 6, 2006)

No matter what the variables of a fight are, the time to leave is *as soon as it is safe to do so* - whatever that may mean in your specific encounter.  Self defense - as has already been said - is about surviving and protecting your self - there is no reason to hang around after you've created a *safe* means of egress, BUT it is also important to do *whatever* it takes to make yourself *safe*


----------



## still learning (Jul 6, 2006)

Explorer said:
			
		

> We teach that force is used to create an avenue for escape. That is best accomplished when your attacker is incapacitated in some way ... in pain, unconcious or broken.
> 
> If you stick around the bad guys friends WILL come to his aid in one way or another. They may come to his aid when you start winning. It is extremely important to clear the danger zone as soon as possible and call the police to tell them what happened. Bad guys have been known to call the cops when they find themselves on the losing side ... as a last shot at you.


 
Hello, Excellent point...one should leave as soon as one can get away...trust your instincts...leave/run away. (you can always call the police later)!

I had a friend who grew up in a rough place..the learn early on..keeping hitting till the guy cannot move...because if you stop early..the other guy/guys will recover and stomp you....experience is a great teacher! ..Aloha

Note: No two situtions will be the same...trust the instincts....


----------



## Explorer (Jul 6, 2006)

It seems to me the mere fact that we're thinking about and discussing such an issue bodes well for us.  The time for clear headed assessments is before you're in a tight spot and forced into split second decisions that may permanently change your life or someone elses.

It may even encourage us to leave before trouble starts ... always the preferred method.


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 7, 2006)

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> No matter what the variables of a fight are, the time to leave is *as soon as it is safe to do so* - whatever that may mean in your specific encounter. Self defense - as has already been said - is about surviving and protecting your self - there is no reason to hang around after you've created a *safe* means of egress, BUT it is also important to do *whatever* it takes to make yourself *safe*


Good points. Sometimes though it might *appear* to be safe for us to leave - particularly in this case where we have gained the upper hand and we're actively *seeking* that means of egress - but what we mistake for dominating the aggressor might just be their cue to start again. I think in these cases how soon or how late to stop is perhaps not always black and white. What do you think?

Respects!


----------



## MartialIntent (Jul 7, 2006)

Drac said:
			
		

> For us in Law Enforcement we stop when the suspect/subject/ stops resisting long enough to put the cuffs on..As *DARK *posted 'The fun comes when the idiot you're dealing with is pumped up on PCP or has been smoking "wet" cigarettes..I agree with *spinkick* sentiments "I'd rather have an ugly trial than a beautiful funeral...


Drac, this is a good clear answer, thanks! Having a specific goal such as restraint in the cuffs definitely gives you the advantage over the rest of us in knowing when to stop. Can I ask if they *don't* stop resisting do you keep on applying what you're applying? Or do you escalate it up to something else?

Respects!


----------



## Drac (Jul 7, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Can I ask if they *don't* stop resisting do you keep on applying what you're applying? Or do you escalate it up to something else?Respects!


 
Speaking for myself..If I encounter resistance I don't try to match whatever force the suspect is using, I try to respond with one level above..Trying to meet a physical force with the same physical can make it a ver drawn out episode and increases the chance of a weapon grab etc..etc..99% of the time back up is in route..


----------



## tradrockrat (Jul 7, 2006)

MartialIntent said:
			
		

> Good points. Sometimes though it might *appear* to be safe for us to leave - particularly in this case where we have gained the upper hand and we're actively *seeking* that means of egress - but what we mistake for dominating the aggressor might just be their cue to start again. I think in these cases how soon or how late to stop is perhaps not always black and white. What do you think?
> 
> Respects!


 
Absolutely.  Every encounter is different so the safe means of egress will be different.  It's all grey area, really - unless you knock the guy out cold.  One important point to bring up is that "safe" also implies that you are being safty conscious when you attempt to leave - ie backing up keeping your eyes on the opponent, scaning the area for other threats, putting objects between you and your opponent (preferably a building or even city block  ) so that you can be assured of your safety.

Me personally, I like to *know* my opponent isn't going to get up, so I'm not above stomping a knee when he's down or slaming his face into a curb till I hear a snap - *if* I think this guy really wants to do me serious harm.  Of course if he doesn't, why am I fighting in the first place?


----------



## Gman (Jul 7, 2006)

Here's what my instructor says.

If you knock someone down, make sure they're going to stay down for at least 10-20 seconds.  In that time, you run away.  If they can get back up and chase you it's more dangerous than it was the first time, because now they know you have some skills and they'll be ready for you.

I take this to mean exactly what the majority of people here are saying.  Use the necessary force to escape the situation (and that means making sure you aren't immediately chased), and then call the police.

I really think it makes a lot of sense.


----------



## searcher (Jul 7, 2006)

It is time to stop when you can either: move away without them coming at you again or when you feel no longer threatened by them.   This may sound vague or not like good advice, or a "duh" statement, but with so many variables to factor in it is really up to the individual and the surrounding circumstances.


----------

