# You don't need to fight every jackass that touches you.



## Josh Oakley (Jan 24, 2012)

I was walking back to work from grabbing my food. There was a transient, obviously drunk, off filter, and mumbling to himself, walking in front of me.

I go to use the crosswalk, and all the sudden I feel my left knee buckle, due to being kicked in the back of the knee by said drunken transient. As I turn to assess the situation, he is already about 15 feet away from me, eyes locked on me.

Still being mild confused, all I can think to say is, "What the Hell, dude?"
In response, he yells "STAY OFF MY BACK SIDE FATASS!" and proceeds to scream something incoherent.

At this point, I figure I have three options:
1) *Chase him down and beat the living crap out of him.*
I have a height advantage, a reach advantage, and I am in full control of my facilities. I have more mobility than him, and since it is cold outside, he has a heavy jacket, and I could easily get to him if he has a weapon, since his hands are currently outside his pockets.

However, you just never know. He might have had more martial arts training than me, and the drunkenness might give him an edge through decreased pain response and lowered inhibitions. My fight or flight response has not kicked in, and his obviously has. This gives him another edge.

Even if I win, cops might be alerted, I wouldn't gain anything, and my day would be delayed. He might just come back later with buddies and get revenge. A million other things could go wrong.

I stand to gain nothing and lose everything by going this option. No thanks.

2) * Stand there like an idiot and seam back at him until  he realizes what an idiot he is and apologizes.*

This could escalate to option 1, with all the drawbacks included, and would make me look just as idiotic as he does.. no thanks.

3) *Walk on, making sure he doesn't follow*.
This one makes the most sense. Move along I do.


Yes, it could have potentially been worse by doing nothing. Yes, this means he might do it to someone else. Yes this means I don't get to display my l33t super awesome ninja Zohan skills. 

But it is the easiest, the simplest, most logical decision to make. My blood didn't boil. I don't have that nagging sense of guilt I get from hurting someone, and I don't give the other guy much of a chance to hurt me. 

In a self defense situation, the best option was for me to walk away. 

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 24, 2012)

wise choice, you were not in any danger


----------



## Ken Morgan (Jan 24, 2012)

Obviously you made the right choice.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 24, 2012)

Yuck you got bum germs on your pants:barf:


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 24, 2012)

I am definitely happy with the voice I made. Calf is a little sore though. What a jackass.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 24, 2012)

I've done it myself several times, even when I would have been more than justified in beating them up.  There's just no point to it.  Wouldn't make me feel better, wouldn't improve my day at all.  Honestly, the biggest lesson I've learned thru training is just how horrifically one can damage another human.  Aside from not wanting to get hurt myself, I really don't want to do that to someone else and I won't do it if I have any other choices.  It's not just a matter of being justified, but rather having no other options.  Walking away from a fight (even running if necessary - yes I've done it) is actually really easy to do.

you made the right choice.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 24, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> I've done it myself several times, even when I would have been more than justified in beating them up.  There's just no point to it.  Wouldn't make me feel better, wouldn't improve my day at all.  Honestly, the biggest lesson I've learned thru training is just how horrifically one can damage another human.  Aside from not wanting to get hurt myself, I really don't want to do that to someone else and I won't do it if I have any other choices.  It's not just a matter of being justified, but rather having no other options.  Walking away from a fight (even running if necessary - yes I've done it) is actually really easy to do.
> 
> you made the right choice.



Total agreement.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 24, 2012)

This is of course assuming Youre not being tricky with us.

Are you sure You didnt do 2, then 1, then 3? 



Seriously though, avoiding conflict is better than instigating it. But of course, if faced with conflict, confronting it is the sensible choice.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 24, 2012)

I would add 'let the police know this goofball is out there and what he's up to.'   He might keep at it and hurt someone.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 24, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> This is of course assuming Youre not being tricky with us.
> 
> Are you sure You didnt do 2, then 1, then 3?
> 
> ...



Lol! 
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## MJS (Jan 25, 2012)

Josh Oakley said:


> I was walking back to work from grabbing my food. There was a transient, obviously drunk, off filter, and mumbling to himself, walking in front of me.
> 
> I go to use the crosswalk, and all the sudden I feel my left knee buckle, due to being kicked in the back of the knee by said drunken transient. As I turn to assess the situation, he is already about 15 feet away from me, eyes locked on me.
> 
> ...



Yeah, as tempting as it probably was to clock the guy, you did the right thing.  Of course, Bill made a good point too.  This guy is obviously a hazard to himself and others, so calling the cops is good advice.

OTOH, if he were to follow, unless the guy pulled a weapon, it'd probably be best to exercies good use of force.  Instead of knocking out a few teeth (providing the dirtbag had any in his mouth to start...lol) doing something to not cause too much damage would be a good choice, IMO.


----------



## decepticon (Jan 25, 2012)

Good choice and excellent self control. I agree with Flying Crane, that in many ways our training has given us a better understanding of the short and long term consequences of violence, regardless of whether defensive or offensive.

I second notifying the local authorities. His next victim could be an elderly person or a child with no MA training. Or he might unwittingly select some gang member and get himself killed for a realtively minor offense. While I totally agree that you did the right thing this time, I also feel strongly that behavior like this should not be permitted to continue, for anyone's sake.

In a related vein, is it just me taking more notice or does it seem to any of the rest of you that mental health seems to be in the toilet these days??? I know that many patients who were once kept institutionalized have now been cast out into society where they don't integrate well. But it seems like I see more and more people who appear to have less and less of a grip on reality. Is this the legacy of drug use 20 years ago? Are social and economic pressures causing people to snap? I've pondered this quite a bit lately, especially when we take one of our infrequent trips into the city. Seems like much has changed since we returned to rural life 13 years ago.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 25, 2012)

Honestly, I am less than impressed with Seattle's ability to handle aggressive transients. Or much of anything, really. They would make a note of it, and then not do much of anything until someone else actually DOES get hurt. I have seen it too often in this city. 

Part of it is it's a big city, and there is only so much anyone can do. Part of it is there are a LOT of idiots like this guy in Seattle. 

... And a part of it is that SPD is not that good of a police force,.and are currently busy trying to cover their assess in the FBI investigation. Other cities, I would agree with you, probably. Seattle? Waste of time.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Jan 25, 2012)

Josh Oakley said:


> Honestly, I am less than impressed with Seattle's ability to handle aggressive transients. Or much of anything, really. They would make a note of it, and then not do much of anything until someone else actually DOES get hurt. I have seen it too often in this city.
> 
> Part of it is it's a big city, and there is only so much anyone can do. Part of it is there are a LOT of idiots like this guy in Seattle.
> 
> ...


First, I think you did the right thing.  

But regarding the above, what would you have them do?  

There's a much larger issue being touched on here, and that's mental illness, vagrancy and how most of society tries its hardest to ignore both.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 25, 2012)

Steve said:


> First, I think you did the right thing.
> 
> But regarding the above, what would you have them do?
> 
> There's a much larger issue being touched on here, and that's mental illness, vagrancy and how most of society tries its hardest to ignore both.



There is also, believe it or not, a rights issue.  We all want dangerous lunatics locked up.  But at what point do we consider them 'dangerous' enough to commit them to a mental health facility against their will, given that we have due process in this country?  We're essentially stripping them of their liberty, and it's not against the law to be insane (only to do some of the things insane people do, such as assault someone as happened here).

Given that many repressive regimes used fake 'mental health' reasons for locking up dissidents, it has a rather negative connotation for us.

It's a fine line.  As freedom-loving people, we should rightly be loathe to take someone's freedom away because they have mental health issues, unless they are clearly a danger to themselves or others; but the bar is intentionally set rather high, mainly because we don't want to go around locking people up who might be ill, but pose no threat.

One of the issues I ran into when I worked in LE was that many homeless people clearly suffer from mental issues; and not all of them are related to drug or alcohol abuse (although that is often in the mix as well).  Some of them are what we would basically consider 'crazy', and can be aggressive.  But they resist being given shelter or mental health assistance; they do not want it.  As they are free citizens, at what point do we say "Well, you HAVE to get mental health assistance, like it or not?"

And how can we ensure that someday someone doesn't take a dislike to us, report us as 'crazy' and have us arrested and locked up?

Given that health professionals themselves have a very hard time discerning what is mental illness and even more so what is dangerous mental illness, it is even harder for us non-professionals to know what to do.

I don't have the answers here, just posing the questions.


----------



## ATACX GYM (Jan 25, 2012)

Josh Oakley said:


> I was walking back to work from grabbing my food. There was a transient, obviously drunk, off filter, and mumbling to himself, walking in front of me.
> 
> I go to use the crosswalk, and all the sudden I feel my left knee buckle, due to being kicked in the back of the knee by said drunken transient. As I turn to assess the situation, he is already about 15 feet away from me, eyes locked on me.
> 
> ...



Like my sig says..."THE FIGHT YOU WIN IS THE FIGHT YOU'RE NOT IN"


----------



## Carol (Jan 25, 2012)

ATACX GYM said:


> Like my sig says..."THE FIGHT YOU WIN IS THE FIGHT YOU'RE NOT IN"



Love that.  Or as I have joked "She who fights and runs away, lives to fight and run away another day"


----------



## decepticon (Jan 25, 2012)

In my opinion, the rights of the mentally ill end at which point they begin to infringe on the rights of others. No one - mentally ill or otherwise - has the right to assault anyone or break the laws. While it is sad, I do think they should have the right to refuse treatment/assistance if they don't want it. But with that right comes the natural consequences of such a choice. Which can include homelessness, starvation, injury, disease...  The tragic paradox is whether anyone has the right to force aid upon those who don't want it, for their own good.


----------



## WingChunIan (Jan 25, 2012)

MJS said:


> Yeah, as tempting as it probably was to clock the guy, you did the right thing.  Of course, Bill made a good point too.  This guy is obviously a hazard to himself and others, so calling the cops is good advice.
> 
> OTOH, if he were to follow, unless the guy pulled a weapon, it'd probably be best to exercies good use of force.  Instead of knocking out a few teeth (providing the dirtbag had any in his mouth to start...lol) doing something to not cause too much damage would be a good choice, IMO.



Couldn't disagree more. I totally support the intial action of restraint and walking away but if the time for action arrives then it should be full force and no half measures. Underestimating an opponent can be a fatal mistake.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 25, 2012)

Steve said:


> First, I think you did the right thing.
> 
> But regarding the above, what would you have them do?
> 
> There's a much larger issue being touched on here, and that's mental illness, vagrancy and how most of society tries its hardest to ignore both.




Well, nothing. I would have them do nothing.  Which is why I didn't call them. There isn't much they CAN do, in any event. The guy would be right back out on the streets in a short time.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## MJS (Jan 25, 2012)

WingChunIan said:


> Couldn't disagree more. I totally support the intial action of restraint and walking away but if the time for action arrives then it should be full force and no half measures. Underestimating an opponent can be a fatal mistake.



Hmm...well, given the fact that we live in a sue happy world, I figured that it'd be best to assess each situation and act accordingly.  You are free to do as you choose, however, just understand that your actions may come back to haunt you.  

Hell, myself, I've posted that if faced with a weapon, ie: a mugging, that I'd rather not cooperate and instead, fight back immediately.  Some have said that they'd rather cooperate, and then if they felt the badguy wasn't going to leave, but instead use the weapon, try to take them to another location, THEN they'd fight back.  I disagree with that.  But again, that situation is very different from the one described here. 

And before you or anyone else says it...no, I'm not saying the guy in this case didn't/wouldn't/couldn't have/use a weapon.  I'm saying in the situation presented here, to chase the guy down, and bust him up, IMO, isnt warranted, but again, to each their own.

Once again, I've said numerous times, to assess each situation and act accordingly.  Would I bust the guy up?  Sure, if, after I told the guy to **** off and leave me alone, he takes a swing at me, but again, we, as martial artists, should be able to control what we do, again, for each situation.  If someone can't do that, then they've missed out on quite a bit in their training.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 25, 2012)

WingChunIan said:


> Couldn't disagree more. I totally support the intial action of restraint and walking away but if the time for action arrives then it should be full force and no half measures. Underestimating an opponent can be a fatal mistake.



full force and no half measures?  Do you mean you would advocate killing the guy?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 25, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> full force and no half measures?  Do you mean you would advocate killing the guy?




Yes. Also set him on fire, to get the devil out of him.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## jedtx88 (Jan 26, 2012)

If he can move 15 feet in the time it takes you to turn around your probably not going to when that fight no matter how drunk or mentally inept he was... I'd say you made the right decision.  Did his name happen to be Wally West by any chance?


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 26, 2012)

Josh Oakley said:


> Yes. Also set him on fire, to get the devil out of him.
> Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


His pieces, You mean, since Youll have hit him so hard hed break apart.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 26, 2012)

Re-stomp the groin, then drive over him with your car as you leave.

[video=youtube_share;Sr0-ogsa4z4]http://youtu.be/Sr0-ogsa4z4[/video]


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 26, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Re-stomp the groin, then drive over him with your car as you leave.
> 
> [video=youtube_share;Sr0-ogsa4z4]http://youtu.be/Sr0-ogsa4z4[/video]


Dammit, why didnt I think of that


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 26, 2012)

jedtx88 said:


> If he can move 15 feet in the time it takes you to turn around your probably not going to when that fight no matter how drunk or mentally inept he was... I'd say you made the right decision.  Did his name happen to be Wally West by any chance?




...I didn't turn around immediately. He made my knee buckle on the kick, remember? I had to regain my balance first. It takes about a second to move 15 feet. It took me about two to get my bearings. The guy wasn't superhuman, he just caught me entirely by surprise. This might be a revelation for you but you get pretty used to drunken transients walking around near you in Seattle.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 26, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I would add 'let the police know this goofball is out there and what he's up to.' He might keep at it and hurt someone.



I agree with Bill.  We teach our students to follow through with their physical techniques.  We need to teach them to follow through with their mental techniques as well.  Call the police and get him removed from the streets and hopefully get him some help.  At the very least you have got him documented so if he escalates the violence the courts already have a pattern established and can make sure society is better served.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 26, 2012)

Josh Oakley said:


> Yes. Also set him on fire, to get the devil out of him.
> Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk



You'd need to do a full exorcism then, but I could see it being done on the fly.  After you kill him and set him on fire...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2012)

Flying Crane said:


> You'd need to do a full exorcism then, but I could see it being done on the fly.  After you kill him and set him on fire...



I was once in a prison...... (pause)...... on a tour that went with a college class I was in... not as an inmate.... where the guy they had in solitary basically did that.... and he saw the demons leave with the smoke... or at least that is what he told the judge.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 26, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> I was once in a prison...... (pause)...... on a tour that went with a college class I was in... not as an inmate.... where the guy they had in solitary basically did that.... and he saw the demons leave with the smoke... or at least that is what he told the judge.



I KNEW it!!


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 26, 2012)

So, it's been over a decade since my last physical confrontation of any kind (not counting mortars and small arms fire). Is it normal afterword to just feel... I don't know... off? I don't really have a word for what I'm feeling right now.


----------



## chinto (Jan 27, 2012)

depends on the attacker. in your example, no.  If he had been say with in 5 ft. oh ya, you better stop that attacker.  But it is a judgment call of the treat and level of threat if one exists.


----------



## jedtx88 (Jan 27, 2012)

I was just busting your chops bro.  I don't get to make Flash jokes very often.  On that note.  Sweet mother of mercy there are drunken vagrants outside of Texas!


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 27, 2012)

Thanks for clarifying. I think later I would have no problem with my chops busted. This wasn't exactly a pleasant experience for me, though. Give me a week, then bust my chops all ya want.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 27, 2012)

chinto said:


> depends on the attacker. in your example, no.  If he had been say with in 5 ft. oh ya, you better stop that attacker.  But it is a judgment call of the treat and level of threat if one exists.



No, it isn't normal to have odd, undefined feelings about the encounter? Or are you saying no to something else?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 27, 2012)

I think that people in general are uncomfortable with confrontation.  Our society overall tends to encourage an avoidance of confrontation and creates a reality where it is not often necessary, so many of us never get very comfortable with it.  The more intense the confrontation, the more it can get under our skin and mess with our heads.

Yes, I think it is normal.


----------

