# Mental disconnect in martial arts theory



## frank raud (Jul 3, 2019)

Borrowed this from another thread    1) Any such techniques are inherently far, far, far less tested than the rest of what I teach. For example, if I'm teaching a right cross: I've landed multiple right crosses in real fights. My teachers have done the same. Through personal experience, first hand observation or video, we can examine potentially hundreds of thousands of right crosses in different contexts which have succeeded or failed and draw our conclusions regarding what works best. Contrariwise, very few instructors have ever performed an unarmed disarm of a real knife in a real assault. Of those who have, none have had occasion to do so more than a few times at most. Most of those rare occasions have not been witnessed or videoed. We don't know how typical those successes are or what sort of factors may have made a difference. We have even less information regarding the knife disarm attempts that failed. In short, we don't have the dataset for anyone to honestly claim to be an expert on the subject. (That said, I do know instructors who I think are on the right track and other instructors who I think are teaching garbage that will get you killed.)
Articulately explained by Tony Dismukes. And people will nod their heads and say , "Yes, weapon disarms are incredibly difficult to pull off, and it is a little practice area of self defense."

Borrowed from another (different ) thread  "  Any time you resort to a weapon you must be committing to using it. Otherwise it may be taken away from you and used against you by your opponent. " And again, people will nod their heads and say how there is enough of a danger of having a weapon taken away from you that you must take that into consideration before to bring a weapon into play.

If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against you? Is there even anecdotal evidence of bad guys successfully reversing weapons on people using them in self defense?


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 3, 2019)

I don't know how often bad guys take weapons away from people using them in self-defense, but I think the key phrase is "_committing to using it_". If someone is just brandishing a weapon but is psychologically unprepared to actually use it, then the odds of losing control of the weapon go way up. I'd feel a lot more confident in my ability with weapon disarms if I knew my opponent wasn't prepared to actually use it on me.

Another consideration is the degree of acceptable risk. Suppose my odds of successfully disarming a knife-wielding attacker were 10%. That means a 90% chance I'm going to get stabbed in the attempt. (Actually, even higher than that since I might get cut or stabbed in the process of a successful disarm.) In most circumstances there are probably better options, such as running, handing over my money, or finding an improvised weapon of my own.

Now switch it around. Suppose I'm brandishing a knife at an unarmed opponent but I'm unwilling to actually use it. If they sense that and attack anyway then they have a decent chance of either performing an actual disarm or just beating on me until I drop it. Even if that's only the same 10% chance I gave in the previous example, a 10% chance of escalating a non-lethal encounter to a lethal one where the other guy has the weapon is still higher than I'd like.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 3, 2019)

Another thought  - just about all of the successful knife disarms I've seen on video or heard about anecdotally were situations where the knife wielder was brandishing the knife to threaten and not really committing to an attack.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jul 3, 2019)

As a former LEO I can say when you deploy your baton on some idiot, said idiot tries to tie it up and take it. I think it's instinctual. That's why weapon retention is an important part of training.

It's also a lot easier to take a weapon than to use it effectively, but a bludgeoning by an untrained goon hurts too. Worse if it's your own stick he's beating you incorrectly with.

My major gripe with people using weapons is magical thinking. "I will carry X and when I brandish it my troubles will be ended." Perhaps, but not in the way yon knucklehead thinks.


----------



## Buka (Jul 3, 2019)

A uniformed Police Officer is more likely to be disarmed than a private citizen. Because a uniformed Police Officer's weapon is exposed for the world to see on his hip. He is exposed to be watched and measured. It's why I teach handgun Retention and consider it as serious as a heart attack.

And, yes, I am not on youtube so this is all false.

That being said, I have never known a private citizen to be disarmed of a weapon out on the street. Not even one.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 3, 2019)

Buka said:


> A uniformed Police Officer is more likely to be disarmed than a private citizen. Because a uniformed Police Officer's weapon is exposed for the world to see on his hip. He is exposed to be watched and measured. It's why I teach handgun Retention and consider it as serious as a heart attack.
> 
> And, yes, I am not on youtube so this is all false.
> 
> That being said, I have never known a private citizen to be disarmed of a weapon out on the street. Not even one.



I have done it.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 3, 2019)

frank raud said:


> Borrowed this from another thread    1) Any such techniques are inherently far, far, far less tested than the rest of what I teach. For example, if I'm teaching a right cross: I've landed multiple right crosses in real fights. My teachers have done the same. Through personal experience, first hand observation or video, we can examine potentially hundreds of thousands of right crosses in different contexts which have succeeded or failed and draw our conclusions regarding what works best. Contrariwise, very few instructors have ever performed an unarmed disarm of a real knife in a real assault. Of those who have, none have had occasion to do so more than a few times at most. Most of those rare occasions have not been witnessed or videoed. We don't know how typical those successes are or what sort of factors may have made a difference. We have even less information regarding the knife disarm attempts that failed. In short, we don't have the dataset for anyone to honestly claim to be an expert on the subject. (That said, I do know instructors who I think are on the right track and other instructors who I think are teaching garbage that will get you killed.)
> Articulately explained by Tony Dismukes. And people will nod their heads and say , "Yes, weapon disarms are incredibly difficult to pull off, and it is a little practice area of self defense."
> 
> Borrowed from another (different ) thread  "  Any time you resort to a weapon you must be committing to using it. Otherwise it may be taken away from you and used against you by your opponent. " And again, people will nod their heads and say how there is enough of a danger of having a weapon taken away from you that you must take that into consideration before to bring a weapon into play.
> ...



Because self defense is story based.


----------



## JP3 (Jul 3, 2019)

Buka said:


> And, yes, I am not on youtube so this is all false



OK, once again I'm glad that I wasn't drinking coffee right then, that'd have been bad...


I don't have anything to add on the actual question, except as was pointed out above by actual LEO types.   I agree though, I don't know of anyone who has a CHL and had to use it, or carried a defensive blade, or was forced to grab a stick and had it taken away.

And... unless they, figuratively, cut me in half I can't be disarmed as I'm never armed.


----------



## Buka (Jul 3, 2019)

Last week I had a nine year old kid grab my service weapon in my holster. Swear to God. His parents said "Oh, he's just being curious". Again, swear to God.

I can assure you I taught them a lesson they will never forget. Ever.


----------



## rondave72 (Jul 3, 2019)

Forgive me if this looks jacked up,

“If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against?”

Years ago the Toledo Blade printed an FBI statistic that has stuck with me.  In the given year (which be in the middle 90’s), of the 1258 women who pulled a gun on their attacker, all but 15 (yeah, it was really close to that number) had the gun taken away and used against them.

I couldn’t find this stat again if I had to, but that’s how I remember it.


----------



## frank raud (Jul 4, 2019)

rondave72 said:


> Forgive me if this looks jacked up,
> 
> “If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against?”
> 
> ...


  I'd really like to see those statistics.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 4, 2019)

frank raud said:


> Borrowed this from another thread    1) Any such techniques are inherently far, far, far less tested than the rest of what I teach. For example, if I'm teaching a right cross: I've landed multiple right crosses in real fights. My teachers have done the same. Through personal experience, first hand observation or video, we can examine potentially hundreds of thousands of right crosses in different contexts which have succeeded or failed and draw our conclusions regarding what works best. Contrariwise, very few instructors have ever performed an unarmed disarm of a real knife in a real assault. Of those who have, none have had occasion to do so more than a few times at most. Most of those rare occasions have not been witnessed or videoed. We don't know how typical those successes are or what sort of factors may have made a difference. We have even less information regarding the knife disarm attempts that failed. In short, we don't have the dataset for anyone to honestly claim to be an expert on the subject. (That said, I do know instructors who I think are on the right track and other instructors who I think are teaching garbage that will get you killed.)
> Articulately explained by Tony Dismukes. And people will nod their heads and say , "Yes, weapon disarms are incredibly difficult to pull off, and it is a little practice area of self defense."
> 
> Borrowed from another (different ) thread  "  Any time you resort to a weapon you must be committing to using it. Otherwise it may be taken away from you and used against you by your opponent. " And again, people will nod their heads and say how there is enough of a danger of having a weapon taken away from you that you must take that into consideration before to bring a weapon into play.
> ...


There's a fair amount of anecdotal evidence of weapons being used against the original user. Figuring the rarity of such events is subject to all the same data issues referred to in the bit on weapons disarms.

But I think it's a matter of the cost of failure (a measure I use when teaching a technique - what's a likely worst outcome). If a weapon is taken away - and we should concede it's possible, though we don't know how likely - we need to factor how dangerous that makes the situation. A weapon not used (just displayed) seems more subject to being taken away in some circumstances, especially if it's just taken out to show you have it (rather than deployed in a defensive manner). And it raises the threat perception of the other party, so if they don't surrender or bolt, they're likely to be fighting for their lives (with weapons like guns and knives).

I don't think this is a disconnect. Most of us give similar thought to the consequences of other techniques. More than once in the past year, there's been discussion of whether a basic hip throw gives too much access to your back. I think that's a similar thought process.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 4, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'd feel a lot more confident in my ability with weapon disarms if I knew my opponent wasn't prepared to actually use it on me.


I didn't even think of that while I was replying, but oh, hell yes.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 4, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Worse if it's your own stick he's beating you incorrectly with.


Bill, that was unreasonably funny to me. I'm just imagining you thinking, "Oh, for cripes' sake, at least hit me RIGHT!"


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 4, 2019)

Buka said:


> Last week I had a nine year old kid grab my service weapon in my holster. Swear to God. His parents said "Oh, he's just being curious". Again, swear to God.
> 
> I can assure you I taught them a lesson they will never forget. Ever.


Wow.


----------



## rondave72 (Jul 4, 2019)

frank raud said:


> I'd really like to see those statistics.



Well, the best I can help you with was it was an FBI stat and I was in college.  So that is 1990 to 1995.  The Toledo Blade used to put trivia facts in their Peach section.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 4, 2019)

rondave72 said:


> Forgive me if this looks jacked up,
> 
> “If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against?”
> 
> ...


I would bet money you’re misremembering the stat. I don’t know what the percentage is for gun using women to be disarmed, but I’m almost certain it’s not 99%.


----------



## rondave72 (Jul 4, 2019)

That’s why it stuck in my head.  It was so ridiculous.  

But a lotta factors go into pulling out a pistol and using it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Danny T (Jul 4, 2019)




----------



## jobo (Jul 4, 2019)

frank raud said:


> Borrowed this from another thread    1) Any such techniques are inherently far, far, far less tested than the rest of what I teach. For example, if I'm teaching a right cross: I've landed multiple right crosses in real fights. My teachers have done the same. Through personal experience, first hand observation or video, we can examine potentially hundreds of thousands of right crosses in different contexts which have succeeded or failed and draw our conclusions regarding what works best. Contrariwise, very few instructors have ever performed an unarmed disarm of a real knife in a real assault. Of those who have, none have had occasion to do so more than a few times at most. Most of those rare occasions have not been witnessed or videoed. We don't know how typical those successes are or what sort of factors may have made a difference. We have even less information regarding the knife disarm attempts that failed. In short, we don't have the dataset for anyone to honestly claim to be an expert on the subject. (That said, I do know instructors who I think are on the right track and other instructors who I think are teaching garbage that will get you killed.)
> Articulately explained by Tony Dismukes. And people will nod their heads and say , "Yes, weapon disarms are incredibly difficult to pull off, and it is a little practice area of self defense."
> 
> Borrowed from another (different ) thread  "  Any time you resort to a weapon you must be committing to using it. Otherwise it may be taken away from you and used against you by your opponent. " And again, people will nod their heads and say how there is enough of a danger of having a weapon taken away from you that you must take that into consideration before to bring a weapon into play.
> ...


there's so many variations on people and scenarios, that there not contradictory, leaving aside guns, why have you armed yourself in the first place, coz your going to loose otherwise  is the only reasonable answer, either coz he bigger than you, he has a weapon or your out numbered, drawing a weapon may have the effect of putting them off, in which case it's worked, or it may not, in which case if your not going to use it, its made matters worse by tieing up one of your hands, and has quite possibly turned up the level of violence he or they will use, if they produce a weapon in response or decided to give you a good kicking for having the ttemerity to   threaten them with one.

I've seen people disarmed of weapons in general, rather than knives or guns many times, bottles, bats hammers, etc, they swing, they miss, you've got them,  they can't hit you with a base ball bat, i,f their lay on floor,  not only must you be prepared to use it, you need to have some ability to use itagainst someone who may have been attacked with a weapon several times before and have tactics for such.

going up against knives, is a question if speed and power, if your fast enough and powerful enough once you've got hold if his arm, you can take it off him, if not your going to get stabbed


----------



## Buka (Jul 4, 2019)

Danny T said:


>



That was nasty.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jul 4, 2019)

frank raud said:


> If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against you? Is there even anecdotal evidence of bad guys successfully reversing weapons on people using them in self defense?



I think it has happened a few times, but i dont think thats much of a reason not to carry anything for self defence.  

I think there is a statistic for it, but its more related to police and i think its uncommon, not too sure if it counted attempts or successful attempts.     I personally watched a video last week of a attempt at a pistol.   

Actually i will post some shiv works videos i can find which some people have put up of one of the training stages.    From what i have seen, people drop knives and pistols in the heat of fighting so you get  a mad rush to get it and such.     If someone doesn't literally pry the weapon out of the hand anyway.  






First one i could find, its 2V1 though.  

But what someone put above, plenty of factors involved in this.    if someone has or can fish out a statistic for this tag me into it.


----------



## Buka (Jul 5, 2019)

Danny T said:


>



Everyone at work was watching that vid last night. I'm pretty sure that's going to become a training film that will be widely used. It's a good heads up about how determined some people can be.

It also took me aback a bit at how utterly cold I've become about these things.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 5, 2019)

Buka said:


> Everyone at work was watching that vid last night. I'm pretty sure that's going to become a training film that will be widely used. It's a good heads up about how determined some people can be.


When I first viewed this after saying "You're TOO CLOSE!!", one of my first thoughts was this would make a great training film.


----------



## JP3 (Jul 6, 2019)

jobo said:


> going up against knives, is a question if speed and power, if your fast enough and powerful enough once you've got hold if his arm, you can take it off him, if not your going to get stabbed


Or cut. Almost always cut. Even below average with an average-sharp blade, cuts happen all the time. I know some guys who do live blade demos with their knife defense seminars... but they don't allow anyone in the class to actually have live blades out... they use markers, like Sharpies, magic markers and highlighters... so you've effectively got a sort of usual-sized handle/hilt thing and maybe a quarter-inch blade.... now, go practice.

In about 1 minute of back and forth trying to "do stuff, all those marks on each of us trying to get the "blade" away.. it was ludicrous. It changed, and actually got better as we practiced as things like this do... but even at the end, we were getting "cut" nearly 100% of the time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 6, 2019)

JP3 said:


> Or cut. Almost always cut. Even below average with an average-sharp blade, cuts happen all the time. I know some guys who do live blade demos with their knife defense seminars... but they don't allow anyone in the class to actually have live blades out... they use markers, like Sharpies, magic markers and highlighters... so you've effectively got a sort of usual-sized handle/hilt thing and maybe a quarter-inch blade.... now, go practice.
> 
> In about 1 minute of back and forth trying to "do stuff, all those marks on each of us trying to get the "blade" away.. it was ludicrous. It changed, and actually got better as we practiced as things like this do... but even at the end, we were getting "cut" nearly 100% of the time.


Part of what I like about this approach (though it does have problems, like any drill) is that there's sort of a tally at the end to give you a sanity check. When you practice with a soft knife, you can fool yourself into thinking you mostly didn't get cut. But when you have marks all over, it's tough to delude yourself.


----------



## frank raud (Jul 9, 2019)

Rat said:


> I think it has happened a few times, but i dont think thats much of a reason not to carry anything for self defence.
> 
> I think there is a statistic for it, but its more related to police and i think its uncommon, not too sure if it counted attempts or successful attempts.     I personally watched a video last week of a attempt at a pistol.
> 
> ...


I've been associated/ trained with/hosted seminars with Southnarc and Shivworks for almost 20 years. I am quite familiar with their work.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jul 9, 2019)

frank raud said:


> I've been associated/ trained with/hosted seminars with Southnarc and Shivworks for almost 20 years. I am quite familiar with their work.



Good good.

Also i think i missed the point, i was going to write the issue with disarms and not working is, some people sell them in a manner of you wont get cut if trying to go for a blade.  the methodology which most people see and show for demos is quite different from how you would apply that and set it up etc. And then as previously mentioned in self defence most people should have their alert on if someone is close enough to them to grab them etc where as police open carry usually and get themselves in situations where people can go for their pistol easier.  

I will give you there is a weird duality but it might stem from ignorance of the realities of using weapons more so by the unarmed folks than the armed folks.      Over estimating stopping power of firearms, how hard it is to kill someone, how quickly they can run etc.   (No myth that no martial art has firearms in it, anything to do with firearms is usually not given the category of "martial arts school.)   

The skillet of learning to disarm is a pretty circumstantial thing and has a pretty high risk to it.  They arent something you can do that easily and they arent something you can do in every circumstance which wont result in death, incapacitation or maiming. (there is always a risk of that when trying these anyway)  the disarm isnt really the most important thing in disarms anyway, its the set up, control of distance, distraction to counter ambush and aggression etc is more important than how you get the weapon off them or stop the threat as you wont have a high chance unless you set it up right.   

I cant comment that much on it as i havent done it, but the only thing i can do is punch so you can expect me to if i cant run to be punching somone who is attacking me as my disarm.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 9, 2019)

Rat said:


> Good good.
> 
> Also i think i missed the point, i was going to write the issue with disarms and not working is, some people sell them in a manner of you wont get cut if trying to go for a blade.  the methodology which most people see and show for demos is quite different from how you would apply that and set it up etc. And then as previously mentioned in self defence most people should have their alert on if someone is close enough to them to grab them etc where as police open carry usually and get themselves in situations where people can go for their pistol easier.
> 
> ...


Well, if you can hit them hard enough to make them sit down, the weapon becomes less relevant.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jul 9, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Well, if you can hit them hard enough to make them sit down, the weapon becomes less relevant.



Concussion is a concussion doesn't matter what you use to deal it with.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jul 9, 2019)

rondave72 said:


> Forgive me if this looks jacked up,
> 
> “If a weapons disarm is a last ditch thing for a skilled practitioner, why is it accepted as fact that the bad guy will be able to disarm you, and use your weapon against?”
> 
> ...





frank raud said:


> I'd really like to see those statistics.



I've been intermittently looking for those stats over the last week/weekend. Haven't been able to find anything. Not just stats with those figures, I can't seem to find any statistics of females using guns and then having them used against them. It's also not archived (which would make sense given the time). Since I can't find those stats for any year, I would bet that there was either a misunderstanding of stats, or an opinion piece where someone pulled the number out from their *** to make a point in their article.


----------



## Buka (Jul 11, 2019)

While I feel very comfortable and confident with a knife in my hand, I gave up trying to learn knife disarms years ago. The various ones I learned in various dojos just don't work for me.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 11, 2019)

Buka said:


> While I feel very comfortable and confident with a knife in my hand, I gave up trying to learn knife disarms years ago. The various ones I learned in various dojos just don't work for me.


We teach disarms. But not for sake of disarming. More for reference points and countering. When actually working disarm counters it is quickly apparent the counters are easier than the disarms are.
When it comes to disarms. Don't attempt a disarm if the weapon arm is undamaged or the person hasn't been disoriented.
Disarming should be a by-product of attacking. It happens because you have placed the weapon and weapon arm in a position that as you attack the disarm happens. Don't disarm for the sake of disarming.


----------



## Buka (Jul 11, 2019)

Danny T said:


> We teach disarms. But not for sake of disarming. More for reference points and countering. When actually working disarm counters it is quickly apparent the counters are easier than the disarms are.
> When it comes to disarms. Don't attempt a disarm if the weapon arm is undamaged or the person hasn't been disoriented.
> Disarming should be a by-product of attacking. It happens because you have placed the weapon and weapon arm in a position that as you attack the disarm happens. Don't disarm for the sake of disarming.




This makes a great deal of sense to me.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 14, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Another thought - just about all of the successful knife disarms I've seen on video or heard about anecdotally were situations where the knife wielder was brandishing the knife to threaten and not really committing to an attack.





Bill Mattocks said:


> As a former LEO I can say when you deploy your baton on some idiot, said idiot tries to tie it up and take it. I think it's instinctual. That's why weapon retention is an important part of training.
> 
> It's also a lot easier to take a weapon than to use it effectively, but a bludgeoning by an untrained goon hurts too. Worse if it's your own stick he's beating you incorrectly with.
> 
> My major gripe with people using weapons is magical thinking. "I will carry X and when I brandish it my troubles will be ended." Perhaps, but not in the way yon knucklehead thinks.



Agree. The greatest point I try to drive home when teaching people at any level, be it unskilled to LEO, is IF you PULL a weapon of any kind it must be with the full intention to use it. This includes deterrents like pepper spray. Never as a scare tactic.
More to the point, there is so much mental angst in actually pulling the trigger, literally, that much of the mental preparation has to take place before hand. Repetition, repetition, repetition. 
It is easy to talk about and discuss what Should happen in the moment. I do not believe any amount of repetition fully prepares a person but it is the best we can do. Some people can simply handle the pressures of intense encounters better than others.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 14, 2019)

Danny T said:


> We teach disarms. But not for sake of disarming. More for reference points and countering. When actually working disarm counters it is quickly apparent the counters are easier than the disarms are.
> When it comes to disarms. Don't attempt a disarm if the weapon arm is undamaged or the person hasn't been disoriented.
> Disarming should be a by-product of attacking. It happens because you have placed the weapon and weapon arm in a position that as you attack the disarm happens. Don't disarm for the sake of disarming.


Well said Danny. Made the point much better than I did.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jul 14, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Agree. The greatest point I try to drive home when teaching people at any level, be it unskilled to LEO, is IF you PULL a weapon of any kind it must be with the full intention to use it. This includes deterrents like pepper spray. Never as a scare tactic.
> More to the point, there is so much mental angst in actually pulling the trigger, literally, that much of the mental preparation has to take place before hand. Repetition, repetition, repetition.
> It is easy to talk about and discuss what Should happen in the moment. I do not believe any amount of repetition fully prepares a person but it is the best we can do. Some people can simply handle the pressures of intense encounters better than others.



I agree. And with respect to your last post, let me make an admission. The things I experienced in the Marines as a young man did not bother me, and I thought that I had escaped the mental and emotional consequences of them. Starting from my mid to late 50s, it turns out I was wrong, very wrong. I am suffering and paying the price and I never thought that bill would come due.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 14, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I agree. And with respect to your last post, let me make an admission. The things I experienced in the Marines as a young man did not bother me, and I thought that I had escaped the mental and emotional consequences of them. Starting from my mid to late 50s, it turns out I was wrong, very wrong. I am suffering and paying the price and I never thought that bill would come due.


Understood. If it helps to vent, by all means vent. Whatever it takes to help.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 14, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I agree. And with respect to your last post, let me make an admission. The things I experienced in the Marines as a young man did not bother me, and I thought that I had escaped the mental and emotional consequences of them. Starting from my mid to late 50s, it turns out I was wrong, very wrong. I am suffering and paying the price and I never thought that bill would come due.


Bill...sorry to hear. Please get some help if you haven't as yet. I understand your pain. Things I closed off years ago from my stint in service and moved on from began to affect me in my late 50's. Visions suddenly began to creep into my dreams turning into nightmares and restless sleep. I'd wake up thinking I was there again. Then during the day something would thrust the emotions I had in check into chaos. Was able to get professional help and came to terms with somethings I had never addressed. Get some help Buddy.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jul 14, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Bill...sorry to hear. Please get some help if you haven't as yet. I understand your pain. Things I closed off years ago from my stint in service and moved on from began to affect me in my late 50's. Visions suddenly began to creep into my dreams turning into nightmares and restless sleep. I'd wake up thinking I was there again. Then during the day something would thrust the emotions I had in check into chaos. Was able to get professional help and came to terms with somethings I had never addressed. Get some help Buddy.


Those walls we put up have a lifespan don't they. Eventually they come down.


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Jul 14, 2019)

I've only been in one fight where anything significant was on the line, and that gives me pause when teaching anything applied, let alone when a weapon is involved.

That being said, I teach my students that anything you do in self-defense is going to involve a calculation of risk to benefit, as well as an assessment of alternatives. These things may be done consciously or unconsciously, but they should occur. In my one fight, I subdued the guy, who had tried to strangle me, and then let go of him to grab my phone and call the cops. At that point he retreated and returned with a razor. At that point, I retreated, barricaded the door, and grabbed my firearm while waiting for the cops to arrive.

Many, many assessments of risk and benefit occurred in that altercation. They were going through the entirety of the verbal escalation leading up to it. When my attacker grabbed and then tackled me, my assessment of risk told me that a triangle choke was too risky, leading me to pull guard, flip him around, and go for a safer rear naked choke. My risk assessment said that a loss of control when going for my phone was worth the knowledge that the police would be on their way. When he grabbed the razor, I was in no way confident enough to take him on unarmed, and I knew that if I brandished my firearm, there was no way to ensure the situation would de-escalate, and so, not accepting that risk, I barricaded myself and waited for backup. For those of you who are wondering, I didn't do that in the first place because there was an unconscious third party present, and the initial attack was at him, not me.

All that is to say that, while I'm glad I have training in knife/club/gun disarms, the fact that many martial arts teachers have never had to use their craft in general, let alone against a weapon, makes for the dearth of real-life data OP described. As such, while I avoid fights in general, I especially avoid dealing with weapons unless I have my own in hand. It's too much risk for too little benefit under all but the most extreme circumstances.


----------



## dvcochran (Jul 14, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Those walls we put up have a lifespan don't they. Eventually they come down.


Bill, I am a praying man and know that me and my family will be praying for you.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jul 15, 2019)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Those walls we put up have a lifespan don't they. Eventually they come down.


They only come down if you let them...I'm technically qualified (as per US govt) to help people with that sort of PTSD but I refuse to do so, since I feel without experience I'm not qualified for it. 

That said, IMO it's best to let those walls down with a therapist (with experience with that), and learn to cope with it. Those feelings, nightmares/flashback/guilt/shame/terror/whatever you're experiencing don't have to last forever. But if you don't get help, they might.

Again, as I said, I may not have experienced it, but I truly thank you and @Danny T for what you have done, allowing the rest of use to live in this country safely, and not having to go through those same things, selfish as it may be.


----------



## Bruce7 (Jul 15, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Another thought  - just about all of the successful knife disarms I've seen on video or heard about anecdotally were situations where the knife wielder was brandishing the knife to threaten and not really committing to an attack.


Excellent video


----------



## Bruce7 (Jul 15, 2019)

Danny T said:


>



They were excellent police officers, they gave that man every possible chance to live.
In Houston most officers would empty their clip at the first sign of trouble.
These officers show remarkable restrain. 

One thing is confessing did he put his gun in his holster rather kill the man, thinking he could disarm him?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 15, 2019)

Bruce7 said:


> They were excellent police officers, they gave that man every possible chance to live.
> In Houston most officers would empty their clip at the first sign of trouble.
> These officers show remarkable restrain.
> 
> One thing is confessing did he put his gun in his holster rather kill the man, thinking he could disarm him?


I assume you meant "one thing is confusing"?


----------



## Bruce7 (Jul 15, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I assume you meant "one thing is confusing"?


thank you


----------



## Danny T (Jul 15, 2019)

Bruce7 said:


> They were excellent police officers, they gave that man every possible chance to live.
> In Houston most officers would empty their clip at the first sign of trouble.
> These officers show remarkable restrain.
> 
> One thing is confessing did he put his gun in his holster rather kill the man, thinking he could disarm him?


Listening to the audio. I believe he was going to his taser. Got rushed and was in process of re-deploying his service weapon. The disconnect was his failure to realize the subject was still life threatening and going to a non-lethal weapon.


----------



## Bruce7 (Jul 15, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Listening to the audio. I believe he was going to his taser. Got rushed and was in process of re-deploying his service weapon. The disconnect was his failure to realize the subject was still life threatening and going to a non-lethal weapon.


Thank you that explains a lot. I respect him very much for not wanting to take a life.


----------

