# Kenpo Gun techniques



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Jul 17, 2005)

Posted this on the Kenponet already.  Per advise from a friend I thought I'd post it here as well.

Have a question, maybe someone has an answer. In many of the Kenpo gun techniques and their variations I've been taught the student grabs the weapon from over the top. My question is this, were these technique designed as studies to how to disarm a revolver? My historical knowledge of firearms is trivial at best so I don't know which kinds of guns were prevalent when the Gun techniques were designed. I do however have friends that are......gun enthusiasts for lack of a better word. We tried some experimentation with the techniques a while back and I found this. Grabbing the top of a revolver tends to prevent the chamber from rotating to load the next round thus preventing the gun from firing after the first round is fired (don't panic we had access to blank rounds and a gun range just in case). However I tried that with a few firearms that had slides and the results were less than friendly. Using oven mitts in place of my bare hand most of the 'slide' weapons still discharged while being held. The slides slid back anyway and sliced/ripped the mitts open. I could also feel a discomforting amount of heat from the expelled gas and shell. My guess (and I say guess as I can't be sure what it would really feel like, I had gloves on) is that had that been my hand I would have released the weapon from pain and instinct and been shot by the aggressor anyway. So I toyed around with using a 'matching grip' on the gun disarms to keep my hand safe from the slide and shell ejector and it immediately places the firearm in a position to be fired if necessary without having to cover to a safe distance and then flip the weapon around to a proper grip. Just wondering if anyway with any extensive knowledge of firearms and kenpo disarms may be able to provide any commentary/suggestions/ideas for further study/etc. Anyone of the older generation know what kinds of guns were prevalent when the techniques were devised? Any input would be greatly appreciated. Hailing from 'Outside the Box' MD.

James Hawkins III, HI
Hawkins Kenpo Karate
Baltimore, MD


----------



## Doc (Jul 17, 2005)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> Posted this on the Kenponet already.  Per advise from a friend I thought I'd post it here as well.
> 
> Have a question, maybe someone has an answer. In many of the Kenpo gun techniques and their variations I've been taught the student grabs the weapon from over the top. My question is this, were these technique designed as studies to how to disarm a revolver? My historical knowledge of firearms is trivial at best so I don't know which kinds of guns were prevalent when the Gun techniques were designed. I do however have friends that are......gun enthusiasts for lack of a better word. We tried some experimentation with the techniques a while back and I found this. Grabbing the top of a revolver tends to prevent the chamber from rotating to load the next round thus preventing the gun from firing after the first round is fired (don't panic we had access to blank rounds and a gun range just in case). However I tried that with a few firearms that had slides and the results were less than friendly. Using oven mitts in place of my bare hand most of the 'slide' weapons still discharged while being held. The slides slid back anyway and sliced/ripped the mitts open. I could also feel a discomforting amount of heat from the expelled gas and shell. My guess (and I say guess as I can't be sure what it would really feel like, I had gloves on) is that had that been my hand I would have released the weapon from pain and instinct and been shot by the aggressor anyway. So I toyed around with using a 'matching grip' on the gun disarms to keep my hand safe from the slide and shell ejector and it immediately places the firearm in a position to be fired if necessary without having to cover to a safe distance and then flip the weapon around to a proper grip. Just wondering if anyway with any extensive knowledge of firearms and kenpo disarms may be able to provide any commentary/suggestions/ideas for further study/etc. Anyone of the older generation know what kinds of guns were prevalent when the techniques were devised? Any input would be greatly appreciated. Hailing from 'Outside the Box' MD.
> 
> ...


Well sir to get the ball rolling; The Kenpo Gun techniques in the commercial system are essentially ineffective without serious tweaking from a good teacher. Even then some are not salvageable. The reasons are plentiful but let's look at the most obvious.

The gun techniques were created when the most prevalent handgun you might be confronted with is a revolver. Believe it or not there are still plenty of these on the street, but the ratio in my expereince is down (or up)  to about 50/50 when you take a bad guy down who's "holding heat." The statistical chances of being confronted by a "pistol" (autoloader) are significant enough to pay attention to the facts you have presented here. 

One of my students took a guy down two days agao who was prone but slowly reaching for his pocket. A significant close kneel stance that knocked the wind out of him and a subsequent search revealed a 4 inch Ruger revolver that the suspect claimed he was trying to "toss." They are still out there.

On another note recognize the "controlling" of a handgun held offensively by someone as a threat to your person, requires specific skills and a physical philosophy that is not conceptual and goes far beyond what can be learned from "motion." The reason these skills are absent for many is the same reasons pushes, locks, and holds, are treated as "attempts." The knowledge to survive what has already occurred isn't present for many. Therefore most are told to move first. Easy when you know its coming.

Good question sir, perhaps others could ring in their observations and experiences. Stick around. I think you'll like it here.


----------



## sandan (Jul 18, 2005)

Good post!  As martial artists, our techniques are relatively useless when an attacker points a gun from a few feet away, outside of our critical distance.  Once the weapon comes within range, there are so many variables tat come into place; how far is the attacker, how is he positioned in relation to you, how is he gripping the weapon, what body part is he aiming at, etc. etc. etc.  For those who study Kenpo the techniques sound great in theory, but once you try to apply it, you'll see and feel how vulnerable you really are.  We have focused on defenses against various weapons where I train at, and we have developed several situations and how to deal with them.  We have even toyed with the revolver vs slide guns.  Some points that were made, that with a revolver that hammer could really hurt the hand; for both types of weapon, if they wer to go off, the barrel would be very hot to the touch.  We have concluded that we would rather get a burn than a bullet wound...we're pretty bright guys!  First and foremost is clearing the weapon and then controlling the weapon at all costs.  I am very interested to see what others have to say.


----------



## hongkongfooey (Jul 19, 2005)

The vast majority of gun disarms taught by martial arts schools are pure fantasy. Only a complete moron is going to place the muzzle of their firearm against the person they are trying to hold up. 

 HKF


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Jul 19, 2005)

Well I can honestly say I have met at least two "complete morons" and one smart guy that shot me from a distance.  The smart guy grazed me and I ran, the two morons were disarmed using techniques I learned from Ju Jitsu.  So the morons may not be smart, but the fact that they exist warrants a logical defense in my book.  Perhaps we only get the morons in Baltimore, but considering the fact that the "smart guy" clipped me I'm glad he wasn't up close.  I'm even more glad that the fantasy techniques saved me before the morons took a page from the smart guy.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jul 20, 2005)

While I've seen the kenpo gun tech's performed, I haven't had them taught to me yet so I can't really comment other than to say that to me they don't look to be very "workable."

As far as dealing with the action of the gun, Like Doc said, revolvers are still pretty common.  In fact, I remember seeing a report from the ATF a while back that listed the 10 most common firearms used in violent crime (to their knowledge).  The one that topped the list was the .38-special revolver, but I digress.
Revolvers can be rendered unable to fire by gripping the cylinder.  This requires very little force, no more than you would use when giving a firm handshake.  However, as soon as you release that pressure it will again be capable of firing.  If by some chance the revolver is already cocked--if it's being used in single-action mode--grabbing the cylinder will accomplish nothing more than giving you some nice burns and possibly, shavings from the bullet in your hand.  Like I said, it doesn't take much force to stop the cylinder rotation, the hard part is getting a proper grip on the gun (enough of your hand on the cylinder to immobilize it).

Automatics have their own list of issues.  The problem with an auto is that you cannot prevent the first shot by grabbing the gun unless you push the slide "out of battery" (that's another discussion). Once again though, it really doesn't require a whole lot of force to keep the slide from fully cycling. if you can prevent the slide from completing it's cycle (ejecting the spent case, cocking the hammer, feeding a new round) then there will be no subsequent shots.  I have personally tested this with both a 9mm and a .45 and in neither case did the slide travel even far enough to eject the spent case (I would estimate about 1/8" of travel for the 9mm and about 1/4" for the .45) 





			
				Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> The slides slid back anyway and sliced/ripped the mitts open. I could also feel a discomforting amount of heat from the expelled gas and shell.


 If you grabbed the autos in the same manner as the revolver (hand on top of the gun over the action) then this would be the case.  The best way to grab an auto (for the purposes of this discussion) is by the slide forward of the trigger guard.  By grabbing in this manner, either your fingers or your thumb will be in front of the trigger-guard thereby keeping your hand from traveling with the slide as it tries to cycle.  If you are successful in preventing slide travel, the gun will be inoperable until you manually cycle the action.


----------



## Doc (Jul 20, 2005)

hongkongfooey said:
			
		

> The vast majority of gun disarms taught by martial arts schools are pure fantasy. Only a complete moron is going to place the muzzle of their firearm against the person they are trying to hold up.
> 
> HKF


Actually sir, it is quite common for street gangsters to do that when their initial intent is to not shoot you. The intimidation factor plays well on the street my friend. If they want to cap you, they just walk up and bang, or drive by. Yes, it happens all the time, and not like in the movies. When they want something from you, they attempt to intimdate you into submission by placing the weapon against your body or very close. Most recently, they like to put it "in your face," in my experience. They are not as foolish in some areas as you think. How many times have you held someone at gunpoint?


----------



## still learning (Jul 20, 2005)

Hello, No two situtions will be same.  We do practice gun defense techniques, from the back, side and front.  Moving inside and outside.   When the time comes we must use our instincts. and trust what to do? 

 Better to practice and learn a few defense moves, than at least if need to we can react if our instincts say so. ................Aloha


----------



## Marcus Buonfiglio (Jul 21, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Well sir to get the ball rolling; The Kenpo Gun techniques in the commercial system are essentially ineffective without serious tweaking from a good teacher. Even then some are not salvageable. The reasons are plentiful
> 
> Well said Mr. Chapel. One thing that also needs to be addressed is the direction of the discharge. To not control the direction of the discharge is to potentially kill your loved one or an innocent bystander. Something that doesnt concern the BG but weighs heavy on my mind. Mr. Pick has addressed this as I am sure you have. Also although not as prevelant in the civillian arena is the correct understanding of rifle disarm. A longer weapon supported by both hands at different depth zones creates a different set of parameters that have to be dealt with. But maybe that is for a different thread.
> 
> Good topic and interesting input.


----------



## Doc (Jul 22, 2005)

Marcus Buonfiglio said:
			
		

> Doc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Thesemindz (Jul 22, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Well sir to get the ball rolling; The Kenpo Gun techniques in the commercial system are essentially ineffective without serious tweaking from a good teacher. Even then some are not salvageable. The reasons are plentiful but let's look at the most obvious.



I'm curious as to what other reasons you have as to why the Kenpo gun techniques in the commercial system are essentially ineffective. I would agree that as a whole, any of the gun techniques is highly unlikely to unfold in reality exactly as it plays in the standard technique, although I think that can be generally said of any technique due to our opponent being a variable which is at least, to some degree, uncontrollable. I do think that the kenpo gun techniques contain some useful disarm techniques, as well as useful striking patterns and can be used to teach the student a great deal about the possible paths of motion which can be accessed from those positions. Of course, I practice a style of motion kenpo, so that sort of thing is important to our approach to training. I see this with the knife techniques as well. Perhaps as a whole they are not entirely practical, however, the component pieces can each be applied in a variety of scenarios and should be drilled independently to develop the student's ability to access those skills, as well as within the technique as a whole to develop the ability to transition from one movement to another fluidly.

I would agree that the techniques should be supplemented with discussion and drilling regarding psychological mindset, both of the attacker and the victim, acceptance of risk both to self and others, and a thorough understanding of firearms in general, which could also include some time at the range with a live weapon to help desensetize, to some small degree, the student to the noise and shock of a weapon discharge. Again however, I think this type of supplemental training is neccessary to truly understand any technique contained within the system. Without a full understanding of the context of the attack, including the considerations of combat as well as the possible variations of the attack, the student will be unprepared for the reality of a self-defense situation. I feel it is important for the students to practice and fully understand the attack first in order to fully understand the defense. If a student were to practice only the physical curriculum of the techniques, without ever considering the many ancillary aspects of self-defense, either generally or specifically, then he or she would be less capable of accessing those movements in a real situation.



			
				Doc said:
			
		

> On another note recognize the "controlling" of a handgun held offensively by someone as a threat to your person, requires specific skills and a physical philosophy that is not conceptual and goes far beyond what can be learned from "motion." The reason these skills are absent for many is the same reasons pushes, locks, and holds, are treated as "attempts." The knowledge to survive what has already occurred isn't present for many. Therefore most are told to move first. Easy when you know its coming.



Would you go into greater detail regarding specifically which skills and physical philosophy you feel is/are necessary for a student to successfully defend against a weapon? I know that at our school we practice the techniques against "real" attacks, not attempted attacks, in fact this is a point which is often reiterated to the students. When practicing, for instance, push techniques, the students often want to preempt the push with their defense. We make a point of forcing the students to respond to the push, so that they can learn how to react appropriately to the incoming force as well as learn how the attack works. We do drills such as closing the eyes so that they don't have an easy way to predict the exact moment of the attack, thereby forcing the student to respond with their defense, rather than executing it too early. In this way the student learns how to accept the force of a push and maintain their footing, moving into a balanced stance and responding with the appropriate motion and degree of force. What skills do you teach your students when discussing firearms defense?


-Rob


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Jul 22, 2005)

Use BB and pellet guns; that's a start for training in a physical culture that begs for skill. I picked many a BB out of my skin & scalp during gun drills. The instructions to the uke are simple: As soon as you see or feel me move, squeeze the trigger. Great training for learning to get off line, and controlling the weapon. Pain, and the frank knowledge that what you did was too slow or didn't work, provide an impetus for change.

Regards,

Dave

PS -- This is not an endorsement of such activities. Particularly of you are young and/or stupid. I participated in these exercises with active military during Desert Storm days, and with off-duty troops from US & NATO bases (Nav-South, SHAPE). Do not try this at home.


----------



## redfang (Jul 22, 2005)

A couple of points. My main defensive tactics instructor in our academy teaches disarms with movement and initial contact with the gun hand coming from the inside.  The reason for this is that involuntary muscular contractions are much more likely to occur when sudden forceful contact is made to the outside of the gun arm and one is much more likely to take a bullet when moving to the outside.  Our disarms are also taughtwith the aim of getting us to view some injury as a strong possibility and to keep going.  Yes, when grabbing the slide of an automatic weapon it is very likely that one will get some powder burns and maybe lose a little skin in the chamber. (Don't grab the back of the slide ever, that can be messy.) It's even possible that we might get shot.  If that happens, keep fighting.  Lots of people get shot and don't die.  That's key, the not dying part.  Don't die and win.


----------



## MisterMike (Jul 27, 2005)

The gun techniques were taken and adapted from Form 6. It was not until after the 32 system (orange, purple, blue, green, "green-orange extensions") that the gun techniques were added as "techniques."

They address, among other things, the "in, out, up and down" entries when confronted with a fiream. In the Form, they are pretty shaky at best. The techniques, to be used against todays firearms, revolver and non-revolver alike, I would agree they have to be modified, some more than others.

The Parker system prides itself that the techniques have been born from practical experience. That Ed Parker was no doubt a participant in a few fights himself. But the gun techniques are obviously based on theory alone and most likely focused the revolver. There are substantial rumors abound however that Mr. Parker did study the gun, and was known to carry several on his person at a time in order to draw and fire in almost any direction.

Kenpo being the study of motion, Mr. Parker would no doubt have continued and wanted us to continue building on that foundation. The gun techniques could use some attention to bring them up to snuff.


----------



## Doc (Jul 28, 2005)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> There are substantial rumors abound however that Mr. Parker did study the gun, and was known to carry several on his person at a time in order to draw and fire in almost any direction.


Mr. Parker not only studied the gun, but had a substantial collection of firearms of all types from Uzi's to illegal sniper rifles. He did not however carry more than one gun at anytime to my knowledge, even though in California he was "protected" when he carried.

You are correct, the gun stuff in motion is theory, and requires specifics mechnisms you can't get from "motion." Hands on from a good teacher and a clean realistic approach to applications are necessary. Keep in mind that Ed Parker did do this and even had long gun disarms beform "motion" kenpo. That information however was not introduced just like the knife information was held back. You don't tell people to play with motion when attempting to learn to deal with guns and knifes.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Jul 29, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker not only studied the gun, but had a substantial collection of firearms of all types from Uzi's to illegal sniper rifles. He did not however carry more than one gun at anytime to my knowledge, even though in California he was "protected" when he carried.
> 
> You are correct, the gun stuff in motion is theory, and requires specifics mechnisms you can't get from "motion." Hands on from a good teacher and a clean realistic approach to applications are necessary. Keep in mind that Ed Parker did do this and even had long gun disarms beform "motion" kenpo. That information however was not introduced just like the knife information was held back. You don't tell people to play with motion when attempting to learn to deal with guns and knifes.


So....what might some of the required modifications look like?


----------



## Doc (Jul 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> So....what might some of the required modifications look like?


Basics.


----------



## kenpo black belt (Oct 7, 2005)

My sesei was a lieutenent in the NYPD for 20 somewhat years. He taught us some gun disarms from close and afar. Many of you are wondering how you would get the gun if the person is a few feat away. We did an experiment in which we had my senseis real Barreta and put wax shells in it. We started with close up techniques in which he took the gun away without getting shot. About 90% of the techniques worked. Then we started thinking on how to get the gun away from a few feet away. Our best test was when we reached for a wallet and we threw the wallet at them. He had about a second to react before the guy noticed and he ran in and took the gun away. So the best way to take the gun away from afar is to throw something at them when they are not expecting. If you don't like this just give the guy your money. This is mostly for if the guy is actually going to kill you.


----------

