# Back to Reality: Effective Knife Techniques



## Guro Harold (Jan 30, 2007)

Ok, the purpose of this thread is not to point fingers but to get a sense of reality concerning knife encounters.

What do you consider to be proper knife self defense practices and what are some of your pet peeves that you have seen concerning blade self-defense?


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Jan 30, 2007)

Well, I am a firm believer in the Keep It Simple ******** school of using a knife.  I've seen some "experts" get way too complicated with their self defense techniques.  Which leads right into one of my big pet peeves.....

Why does the average Joe on the street need to learn silent "quick kills"?  I'd think the intructors teaching that would be better off having their students get in more reps of the basics.

Jeff


----------



## Carol (Jan 30, 2007)

I don't know if I've been training long enough to call anything a proper technique.  

In a live situation, one may not have the luxury of knowing in advance that someone is coming at you with a bladed weapon.  

That being said...I appreciate is that many systems (including my own) are an effective defense against an attacker whether or not they have something in their hand...instead of seperating techniques (X works against an empty-hand attacker, Y works against a blade-carrying attacker).


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 31, 2007)

Great point Carol! For real, most likely, you won't see it coming, you'll just feel it, in one manner, or another.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jan 31, 2007)

Palusut said:


> Ok, the purpose of this thread is not to point fingers but to get a sense of reality concerning knife encounters.
> 
> What do you consider to be proper knife self defense practices and what are some of your pet peeves that you have seen concerning blade self-defense?



Could I ask for a better or further definition?

Knife Self-defense:

1) Defense against a knife?

2) Self Defense using a knife?

3) Self Defense using a knife against a knife?

4) Effective usage of the knife?

Curious what you are looking for?


----------



## Guro Harold (Feb 1, 2007)

Rich Parsons said:


> Could I ask for a better or further definition?
> 
> Knife Self-defense:
> 
> ...


Hi Rich,

All of these points are great and can be expanded upon. Actually, I had originally listed alot of these in the first draft but decided to take them out so it could be open for discussion.

Thanks,

Harold.


----------



## MJS (Feb 1, 2007)

Palusut said:


> Ok, the purpose of this thread is not to point fingers but to get a sense of reality concerning knife encounters.
> 
> What do you consider to be proper knife self defense practices and what are some of your pet peeves that you have seen concerning blade self-defense?


 
I've thought about this quite a bit when running thru some of the knife defenses. Some are pretty sound in theory, but its getting to that point that makes me think you'd have to be pretty lucky to pull the initial move off. An example from one of the defenses in our material. A #5 poke. This can be done from the outside or the inside. Going to the outside, you're moving off line and doing a parry with your left. Fingers are pointed down. Grasping the hand with your left, you twist the hand slightly and with the right, strip the blade from the hand. 

Now, I can justify the strip, but its the initial one hand grab and control that I'm not so sure about. I also feel that many times, people tend to neglect the other persons reactions. In other words, repeated stabs rather than just one and the use of the other hand to strike at you. 

Like any technique, the chances of not pulling off the entire move is high. I've always been an advocate of getting control of the weapon hand. I'll post this clip as a reference to what I mean by getting control. When you click on the link, the clip will start. However, on the side there are 6 blocks on the side which you can click on and it'll take you to certain parts of the interview. Click on the 2nd one down on the left, where it shows the workout area.

Mike


----------



## Rich Parsons (Feb 1, 2007)

Palusut said:


> Ok, the purpose of this thread is not to point fingers but to get a sense of reality concerning knife encounters.



Well in any knife encounter I have had and I had a knife on me, I never had time to get to mine. Back/front pocket or belt or jacket it did not matter. 

If I did not have something in my hand and there was no distance then it was a matter of survival. If I had it in my hand then I could use it to assist with survival. 

If I had the distance many times posturing and explaining to them what would happen to them if they did not suceed the first time, would many times end in no real contact. 




Palusut said:


> What do you consider to be proper knife self defense practices and what are some of your pet peeves that you have seen concerning blade self-defense?



Some of the pet peeves I have are :

1) Teaching people to counter and to use kill tactics before the student understands what they are actually doing. 

2) This technique qill always work if *you* the student execute it correctly. This takes all blame from the instructor and puts it on the student, when the technique might not have been the best or even a good technique for the situation.  The student may get killed trying something they have no skill set for or not understanding when or where to use it properly. 

3) The lack of discussion of legal issues. I know it is best to be judged by 12 then carried by 6. I agree to a point. But there are things one can do to add to their self defense after they have survived the contact or conflict. As opposed to just going in blindly and making mistakes that could be easily avoided. If you survive and face legal issues it is part of your self-defense, to understand the local laws and also to understand you should talk to a lawyer and say as little as possible if anything at all until you do talk to someone for legal advice.  I am not saying to not defend yourself. I am saying add another layer to your self defense.


----------



## Carol (Feb 1, 2007)

Rich Parsons said:


> 3) The lack of discussion of legal issues. I know it is best to be judged by 12 then carried by 6. I agree to a point. But there are things one can do to add to their self defense after they have survived the contact or conflict. As opposed to just going in blindly and making mistakes that could be easily avoided. If you survive and face legal issues it is part of your self-defense, to understand the local laws and also to understand you should talk to a lawyer and say as little as possible if anything at all until you do talk to someone for legal advice. I am not saying to not defend yourself. I am saying add another layer to your self defense.


 

Great point to bring up, Rich.  That is something that bothers me a lot. 

I understand that it is a very fine line between discussing legal issues and giving legal advice, but the lack of legal discussions in MA in general is something that bothers me a lot.

I've gotten more tough-talking common sense from Marc "The Animal" MacYoung than I have from my MA teachers.   I don't necessarily fault them, I paid for MA lessons and got MA lessons....but, I think there needs to be more resources available.

I would like to see more schools get together with a local defense attorney that can speak more to some of the situations that may arise, and their consequences....especially how their consequences affect individual people, such as how female defenders vs. male attackers may be different than male defenders vs. male attackers.

As much as I would hate to get hurt or raped....I have excellent health insurance and disability insurance to assist me if something bad happens.   Providing my injuries are moderate or less, I may be able to recover either fully or at least enough to regain my career and have part of my old lifestyle.  

If I get charged with a crime though...I risk the career that I have worked so hard to build over the last 15 years, get bankrupted by legal bills...my life grinds to a screeching halt in more ways than one.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

My 2 pet peeves regarding what is taught for knife use and defense:

*#1. The idea that a "knife fight" is going to be a sparring match where squaring off, deuling tactics, or trapping drills are going to be effective.*

This is far from the truth. A knife encounter in this day and age is anything but a sparring match or duel. It is either a. an assassination, or b. a violent encounter where the knife is used as leverage.

In both cases, the the attacker is going to try to overwhelm the potential victim and get the upper hand right away. There will be no real chance to "fight" or spar.

Defense against such a circumstance, whether armed or unarmed, needs to take this in consideration. Most of the drills and sparring and what is taught in most knife programs do nothing to address this.

*#2. The idea that knives are acceptable tools to carry for self-defense.*

Most knife programs and the knife industry propigates knives as tools that can be carried for self-defense purposes. I disagree with this completely. Here is in excerp from a "legalities" article that we hand out in some of our programs:[/B]

*



 
Using a weapon

 
The use of a weapon will call into question your reasonableness if the use of that weapon is not justifiable. We will discuss the only weapons that would be considered reasonable for a private citizen to use in Michigan. Remember that the laws will vary in other countries and states.
Firearm: A legally owned and properly licensed firearm is only to be used in lethal force situations, but is reasonable and recommended as the best tool for lethal force, provided that lethal force is justifiable. The firearm must be legal, and properly registered if it is considered a handgun. If you are carrying a concealed pistol outside of the home, you need the proper permit (Concealed Pistols License). You need to follow the state laws regarding firearms carry and use. Provided that the laws are followed, a firearm is an appropriate self-defense tool.
OC Spray: OC Spray, or "Pepper" spray is a considered a less lethal tool for self-defense, and is acceptable by Michigan standards to carry for self-defense. You must only use pepper spray that is legal for civilian carry, which would be 5% active ingredient or less. Pepper Spray is not to be confused with chemical sprays or irritant products like MACE products, which are illegal in Michigan for citizens to carry.

 Weapons of Opportunity: Weapons of Opportunity are tools or items that you carry or can obtain from your environment and use as a weapon. The primary purpose for these tools is not for force. However, they can be used as such if it is what is available at the time of an attack. The lethality of these could vary from less lethal to lethal. Some examples of weapons of opportunity are keys, handbags, change, belts, books, drink containers like coffee mugs, knives or razors (if used as a utility item), pens, screwdrivers and tools (if used for utility), etc. The key is that you have to reasonably justify that these items are intended for some other utility other then self-defense. So, if I have a screwdriver in my pocket and use it for self-defense, I need to be able to reasonably justify that the screwdriver was intended to be used that day on screws or for prying or for some other utility besides a weapon. If you cannot justify that the weapon of opportunity was intended for use besides self-defense, then you risk being considered a mutual combatant.

The above are the only acceptable weapons for a private citizen to carry for self-defense in Michigan. Anything else, like knives not intended for utility, saps, whips, sticks or clubs, etc. are not acceptable. Illegal weapons, like martial arts weapons outside of the training hall, collapsible batons, tazers, MACE or Pepper spray over 5% active, etc., are not acceptable. The reason that these are not acceptable is because they throw your reasonableness into question. Right or wrong, the court system and the general public does not consider it acceptable to carry these items for self-defense. So for example, if you carry a combat knife, and it is clear that you carry it for "self-defense," then it is likely that you will be considered a mutual combatant by the courts regardless of the totality of the circumstance. It is likely that it will be argued that your actions were premeditated, meaning that you intended to get into a violent encounter with your weapon. If you use unacceptable weapons for force, your entire claim to self-defense will be put into question, and you will likely be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

(C) Tulisan Company 2006

Click to expand...

 
So, nuff' said. Knives are not really acceptable by the court system as "self-defense tools." If you carry them as such, or propigate that others carry them as such, then you are opening yourself up to trouble. 

This doesn't mean that knife arts shouldn't be taught or trained. It just means that this needs to be understood, and that knives should really only be carried for utility as the primary purpose. If used in self-defense because lethal force is justifiable and no other option is available, then that is fine so long as the original purpose of the tool is not to harm someone else.

I think that not enough people that teach knife arts or tactical programs fully explain these facts.*


----------



## Carol (Feb 1, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> *So, nuff' said. Knives are not really acceptable by the court system as "self-defense tools." If you carry them as such, or propigate that others carry them as such, then you are opening yourself up to trouble. *


 
Not really acceptable by the courrt system in Michigan.  

However there is case law in Massachusetts that sets a precedence the carry of folding blades and Swiss Army knives.  The carry in and of themselves shall not be considered the carry of a deadly weapon.

This is why I think it is important for schools to work with defense attorneys.  I am working with one on my own.  They are not that expensive and they can really open one's eyes as what actions stay within the bounds of the law..


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Not really acceptable by the courrt system in Michigan.
> 
> However there is case law in Massachusetts that sets a precedence the carry of folding blades and Swiss Army knives. The carry in and of themselves shall not be considered the carry of a deadly weapon.


 
That is the same in Michigan. You can carry knives. But if you say that you are carrying for "self-defense," then you are essentially saying that you intend to harm someone with your knife if you feel justified, which essentially makes you folding blade or swiss army knife a deadly weapon.

I hammer this point because people need to understand what I am saying. You can carry knives (in most places). But as soon as you say it is for "self-defense" or any reason that implies using it on another human being, you throw your whole claim to reasonableness into question. I can assure you it is this way in probably all states. I do not know of a state where this isn't the case.

That said, I agree with you that instructors need to get legal advice more often.


----------



## Ceicei (Feb 1, 2007)

So if you cannot claim "self defense" since it might be incriminating when carrying a knife, then what can you claim if something happens and you have to use your "tool"?  What would you call it then when defending yourself?

- Ceicei


----------



## Carol (Feb 1, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> So if you cannot claim "self defense" since it might be incriminating, then what can you claim if something happens and you have to use your "tool"? What would you call it then when defending yourself?
> 
> - Ceicei


 
You don't call it anything until you talk with your lawyer, period, end of story.


----------



## MJS (Feb 1, 2007)

See, IMO, this is something that is missing from alot of schools.  They will teach knife defense, offense, etc., but when do they cover the laws?  That is an area that, IMHO, is just as important, if not more important than learning the defenses.

Mike


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> So if you cannot claim "self defense" since it might be incriminating when carrying a knife, then what can you claim if something happens and you have to use your "tool"? What would you call it then when defending yourself?
> 
> - Ceicei


 
The issue is "premeditation." If you say that "I carry a knife for self-defense" then what you are saying is that you are carrying a knife with the intent on doing someone else harm in the event that you are involved in a violent encounter. Because knives are not considered acceptable tools for "self-defense" by the court system or the general public, if you use your knife while claiming that it's intended use was for self-defense, then LE and the prosecutor are likely to consider you a mutual combatant (meaning a willing participant in a fight rather then a victim) where there was premeditation (meaning that you intended to use your knife against another person). 

You will likely face felony charges, such as murder or assault charges.

On the other hand, if you carry a knife because you are a carpenter (for example) and you use it at work, and THEN you get attacked, and lethal force is justified and you use your knife, THEN you claim self-defense, then that is different. Your claim of use of a knife on another person is not premeditated. The original intent was for utility. So the knife is rendered as a tool that was available at the time of the attack. No different then a purse, or a coffee mug, or a wrench if you were working on something at the time of the attack, etc.

Do you understand the difference? I want to make sure I am clear...


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> You don't call it anything until you talk with your lawyer, period, end of story.


 
You can say that you were attacked and forced to defend yourself. You can also give physical description and direction (he was a white male, and he went that-a-way). THEN you don't say anything until you talk to an attorney!


----------



## Ceicei (Feb 1, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> The issue is "premeditation." If you say that "I carry a knife for self-defense" then what you are saying is that you are carrying a knife with the intent on doing someone else harm in the event that you are involved in a violent encounter. Because knives are not considered acceptable tools for "self-defense" by the court system or the general public, if you use your knife while claiming that it's intended use was for self-defense, then LE and the prosecutor are likely to consider you a mutual combatant (meaning a willing participant in a fight rather then a victim) where there was premeditation (meaning that you intended to use your knife against another person).
> 
> You will likely face felony charges, such as murder or assault charges.
> 
> ...



In other words, its how the situation is said, isn't it?  Not in how the knife is used...

- Ceicei

EDIT:  How then would this be dramatically different than using a gun?  A person can claim the gun was used in self-defense since it is evidently not used for carpentry.


----------



## Carol (Feb 1, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> You can say that you were attacked and forced to defend yourself. You can also give physical description and direction (he was a white male, and he went that-a-way). THEN you don't say anything until you talk to an attorney!


 
I could, but I wouldn't.  Other than description/proximity, I would not say anything until I have reached competent counsel. 

That is the advice of one of the most prominent defense attorneys in my state and the person that is working with me for firearms training.  I believe his advice is sound, and have no reason to deviate from it.  But, that's just what I would do.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> In other words, its how the situation is said, isn't it? Not in how the knife is used...


 
Pretty much. How it is said, and how it can be _proved_. The important thing is that I can't say that I carry a knife for "self-defense" because I am essentially saying that the purpose of the knife is for use on another person.

I can't say that I am carrying the knife "for hunting" if I am dressed up and going to the pub either. I have to be able to reasonably prove that my purpose for carrying a knife is true. 

When I was in a suit more often and in an office (seems like a century ago...  ) I carried smaller executive folders rather then larger folders or fixed blades, and I did indeed use it as a utility item around the office (letter opening, packages, etc.). Now I carry a larger knife; folder usually. I also do work around the house and jobs around my property where knives come in handy.

For me, I carry a pistol. So that is my self-defense tool. So, really, my knife is a utilitu item, and I can reasonably prove it as such. My suggestion is that others keep their knives as utility items as well, regardless of whether they carry a pistol or not.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> EDIT: How then would this be dramatically different than using a gun? A person can claim the gun was used in self-defense since it is evidently not used for carpentry.


 
Good question.

The difference is that a legally obtained and carried and licensed firearm is acceptable by society and the courts as a self-defense tool; a knife is not.

It is more about perception then anything else. A law abiding citizen with a properly licensed gun is more likely to be seen as such rather then the same citizen that uses a knife instead and claims that the knife was a self-defense tool. There is this perception that guns are licensed by the state for use in a defensive situation (because in a sense they are) where as knives are not.

The thing to remember is that the courtroom is a huge grey area. If one has to use lethal force in self-defense, one has to expect that they will have to defend him/herself in court, and justify those actions to the police, the prosecuter and attorneys, the judge, and possibly a jury. What makes or breaks any self-defense claim is the issue of "reasonableness," or the question if your actions were fitting of a "reasonable" person.

Well, what is "reasonable?" This is very subjective in nature. What is reasonable to you who is a martial artist who understands knives might be completely unreasonable to the people who are deciding your case.

There is this perception that the laws are definative on these issues. They are usually not. The legal "game" is a dangerous game where you are doing what you can to stack the deck in your favor. There is no black and white answer, as it will be the totality of the circumstance mixed with the subjective interpretations of the courts that decides your fate. So, what you are doing is taking any and all measures to ensure that you win in court as well as in self-defense. Because you can count on facing a scary and difficult battle if you do have to defend yourself, you will be glad that you took the proper precautions.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 1, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> I could, but I wouldn't. Other than description/proximity, I would not say anything until I have reached competent counsel.
> 
> That is the advice of one of the most prominent defense attorneys in my state and the person that is working with me for firearms training. I believe his advice is sound, and have no reason to deviate from it. But, that's just what I would do.


 
That is cool. Remember, it is all about stacking the deck in your favor, not on a black and white answer. So, saying that you "were forced to defend yourself" isn't a bad thing to say even though the self-defense pool has been crapped in, as it may help when the police write that all too important initial report.

This is according to legal experts and criminal attorneys in my state, who are known as being the best at what they do. So, I think that they should all fight in a cage match! :boxing:  

But, seriously, it does just go to show how grey these things really can be. Even among legal experts, not everyone agrees...


----------



## Ceicei (Feb 2, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> The difference is that a legally obtained and carried and licensed firearm is acceptable by society and the courts as a self-defense tool; a knife is not.


Good point.  I really enjoy your posts and how you convey your thoughts.  You've helped give me a better idea and thus, become a better martial artist.  Thank you.

- Ceicei


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 2, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> Good point. I really enjoy your posts and how you convey your thoughts. You've helped give me a better idea and thus, become a better martial artist. Thank you.
> 
> - Ceicei


 
Thanks Ceicei. It helps me to have to articulate myself regarding these issues as well, and helps to see where people are on this matter!


----------



## Carol (Feb 2, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> That is cool. Remember, it is all about stacking the deck in your favor, not on a black and white answer. So, saying that you "were forced to defend yourself" isn't a bad thing to say even though the self-defense pool has been crapped in, as it may help when the police write that all too important initial report.
> 
> This is according to legal experts and criminal attorneys in my state, who are known as being the best at what they do. So, I think that they should all fight in a cage match! :boxing:
> 
> But, seriously, it does just go to show how grey these things really can be. Even among legal experts, not everyone agrees...


 
I wanna see lawyers in a cage match.  I'd pay. :roflmao:

The law is gray, there are many different factors (state, municipal) and....where my too-focused enginerdy brain is focused on talking with the police, there are times when you would need to say more than that...such as calling 911...and would need to know phrases like "forced to defend".  

It is gray, its confusing, and if you live near a state line or live where the states are really small  you may have to learn the laws of more than one state...and that gets even more confusing.   

Its great stuff as usual Cruentus.  :asian:


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 2, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> there are times when you would need to say more than that...such as calling 911...and would need to know phrases like "forced to defend".


 
Very Good point. The 9-11 call is exactly when you would say things like "I was attacked and forced to defnd myself," actually. 



> Its great stuff as usual Cruentus. :asian:


 
Thanks! I try anyway...


----------



## Carol (Feb 2, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> Thanks! I try anyway...


 
Oh you rock!  This is why I don't know if I'd ever teach MA in any capacity.  I'd spend the whole class explaining the details of how to properly dot an i and forget that there are 25 other letters that have to be covered.  :rofl:


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 2, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Oh you rock! This is why I don't know if I'd ever teach MA in any capacity. I'd spend the whole class explaining the details of how to properly dot an i and forget that there are 25 other letters that have to be covered. :rofl:


 
I doubt it!  I'm sure you'd do fine as a teacher. It just takes skill and practice at teaching. Some of my best teachers (Manong Ted Buot) were also Engineers. Sometimes that attention to detail comes in handy!


----------



## Rich Parsons (Feb 2, 2007)

Ceicei said:


> So if you cannot claim "self defense" since it might be incriminating when carrying a knife, then what can you claim if something happens and you have to use your "tool"? What would you call it then when defending yourself?
> 
> - Ceicei



I have forgotten that I had a tool in my pocket and gone to walk into a court room or through airport security. Most of these were before 9/11/01 so it was  not as bad. 

What I tell them is the truth. I carry a blade that has a big enough handle for me to use properly. (* Why and how would you need to use that thing? *) I use it to open boxes at work, sometimes can fly. But what I say is that I am an engineer and travel in dvelopment cars. Sometimes in our testing something can happen, an accident or such.  Done on private property or test facilities. The issue is that the serrated edge cuts the seat belt to get somene out and the tanto tip allows me to puncture the door to open it up to be able to manual open a door. (* If at this time there are any EMT's present they have smiled and I smiel and look at their blade which is similar. *)

I do not recommend you say anything untruthful. If you have a reason for a tool then you have a reason for a tool. 

As to self-defense in the end my car/truck that I used to run someone over or hit them to get away from the bad guy with a weapon could be assault and battery with s deadly weapon with the intent of ... , . Yet the vehicle is nothing more than a tool to get you from point A to point B.


----------



## MJS (Feb 5, 2007)

Just to get the thread back on track a bit, I'd like to discuss some of the knife defenses that we have in our system.  I'm sure there are some that are liked and some that are disliked.  What do you do, if anything, to make them more applicable?

I started a thread here where can continue to discuss the laws, etc. 

Mike


----------



## tuturuhan (Feb 5, 2007)

MJS said:


> Just to get the thread back on track a bit, I'd like to discuss some of the knife defenses that we have in our system.  I'm sure there are some that are liked and some that are disliked.  What do you do, if anything, to make them more applicable?
> 
> I started a thread here where can continue to discuss the laws, etc.
> 
> Mike



Hmmm...lawyer jokes...and the law.   I won't touch it.  I want to...but, I'll try to abide my Mike's thread.

A true story...in his youth, my old teacher Ben Largusa used to go into places called "sugalan"  gambling halls, places where the "old guys" would hang out.  He would listen to them tell tall tales about their knife fighting exploits.  

In heated discussion...someone would invariably stand up to prove he was the real deal.  He would pull up his shirt and say "look...see the scars".

Ben, would walk out thinking...bullpucky (paraphased).  "If this guy was good...he wouldn't have any scars at all.  As Ben mellowed with age, he said he realized the errors of his youth.  "That guy was in fact really good...he was alive to tell the story".

The Secret of the Knife:
Stories aside, effective knife fighting begins with controling one's emotions. This is the secret.  Adrenelin, fight or flight instincts set in as soon as you see a guy holding a "live blade"  It gets worse when the knife is coming toward your belly or your face.  It becomes tantamont when two gives are wielding blades and interacting...even if they are simply doing "decadena".  Fear is very real.

The trick, is to slowly learn to control the fear.  In steps, you begin with just holding the live blade.  Neuological studies show that adrenelin and cortisol (the stress hormone) are more controlled in women than in men.  As such, believe it or not, women are able to control the knife much much better than men.  Secondly, the fine motor movements that women possess, allow them to be "detail oriented" when exacting finesse and fine placement of the blade.  This is why I wait two years before I teach my male students the knife.  

Lastly, the small hidden blade...allows a woman or a man to hide the blade, strategically giving an advantage.  You only show the blade at the last second.  In the movies, Steven Seagal pulls the weapon out and shows you are big and nasty it is.  He attempts to intimidate his opponent and his opponent intimidates back.  My students, are taught to keep the weapon hidden...secret until it is too late.  (The black/white of the Yin/Yang...the male shows his weapon to intimidate...the female keeps it hidden using stealth to her advantane)  (Of course, when the knife bites...it doesn't matter is your knife style is yang/male or yin/female...when it bites it is genderless)


----------



## MJS (Feb 6, 2007)

tuturuhan said:


> Hmmm...lawyer jokes...and the law.  I won't touch it. I want to...but, I'll try to abide my Mike's thread.
> 
> A true story...in his youth, my old teacher Ben Largusa used to go into places called "sugalan" gambling halls, places where the "old guys" would hang out. He would listen to them tell tall tales about their knife fighting exploits.
> 
> ...


 
With all due respects, this really isn't addressing the original thread topic.  This is what was originally posted.



> Ok, the purpose of this thread is not to point fingers but to get a sense of reality concerning knife encounters.
> 
> What do you consider to be proper knife self defense practices and what are some of your pet peeves that you have seen concerning blade self-defense?


 
I take this as picking a knife technique and discussing its application, its weak and strong points, and how, if at all, it could be improved upon.

Mike


----------



## tuturuhan (Feb 6, 2007)

Mike,

We do not have "set knife defenses".  Everything is about absorbing the knife attack and devastating the limb that transports the knife.

If one uses a "set technique" that doesn't fit the situation he gets killed.  For us, the idea is to react to the knife with "one concept/one movement" that can be used in a multiplicity of situations.

With no intent to joke, In the "Karate Kid" the old man talked about "Wax on wax off".    This movement, performed "spherically" rather then simply vertically is what we attempt to do (in general) for every knife attack regardless of the angle of attack.  At some point the circle of the hand will meet the oncoming attack, and the second circular hand will devastate, control and manipulate the transporting arm.

Kamatuuran Concept:
1)  first rule, do not attempt to engage...instead "don't get hit" by moving or positioning your body to go inside the knife to the eye of the storm.  The move is seemingly counter-intuitive.  But, by going inside the arc of the knife, the opponent is in general prevented from striking a second time.  If I were to go backward, it would allow the knife fighter a second chance to reach out and strike.

2)  second rule, if you get hit, (and eveyone gets cut...I don't care how good you are)  your elbows are already positioned into what the "manongs" called the manila envelope (literally).  In this way, you survive to fight another day.

3)  third rule, then and only then engage by devasting, redirecting, and zoning the weapon/knife to further insure your life.

As such, my last post though "storylike" was on point from my perspective.  Though, we may disagree respectfully.

Tuhan Joseph T. Oliva Arriola


----------



## tellner (Feb 6, 2007)

Excellent advice Joseph. Close in or far away. If you sit there at the middle distance and try to grab the knife hand out of the air you will be turned into sushi.


----------



## kuntawguro (Feb 6, 2007)

tuturuhan said:


> Mike,
> 
> We do not have "set knife defenses".  Everything is about absorbing the knife attack and devastating the limb that transports the knife.
> 
> ...




 This is very similar to what I just posted in "Maharlika Kuntaw" close- but  still recognizable


----------



## MJS (Feb 6, 2007)

tuturuhan said:


> Mike,
> 
> We do not have "set knife defenses". Everything is about absorbing the knife attack and devastating the limb that transports the knife.
> 
> ...


 
The Arnis that I train, has knife defenses as part of the regular material.  However, just like an empty hand technique, they're used to give the student a foundation to build off of.  Will the defender be able to pull off a full technique?  Probably not, but as I said, parts, ideas, concepts of the technique can be used.  

Earlier in this thread, I posted a video clip of Karl Tanswell.  IMHO, I think that he brings up some very good points regarding knife defense.  Chances are, our movement, parries, etc. are going to come into play during the initial defense.

Mike


----------

