But...Couldn't You Really Hurt Them?

[Bruno@MT]

Thanks Carol. So as I said: either the relevant verbiage is written in the constitution or in case law. No state requires you to flee your own home in face of a threat.

@GJC: It turns out that was nearly half a century ago, not 2 or 3 years. And the laws were changed because of that. If you say you don't want to live there, it would not be unreasonable for us to expect you to know the details, because otherwise you wouldn't be able to know where you didn't want to live. Btw, Did your state support segregation in the 60s? If so, would that be a reason not to live there as well?

I also see no reason why I should be the one doing the legwork ( I would not even know where to begin looking) considering that you're the one making the unlikely claims, not me. This is like the 911 nutcases who require the sane people to prove that the government didn't blow up the towers. It doesn't work that way. The ones making the claims should be the ones to provide the proof.

 

[Carol]

Thanks Carol. So as I said: either the relevant verbiage is written in the constitution or in case law. No state requires you to flee your own home in face of a threat.

@GJC: It turns out that was nearly half a century ago, not 2 or 3 years. And the laws were changed because of that. If you say you don't want to live there, it would not be unreasonable for us to expect you to know the details, because otherwise you wouldn't be able to know where you didn't want to live. Btw, Did your state support segregation in the 60s? If so, would that be a reason not to live there as well?

I also see no reason why I should be the one doing the legwork ( I would not even know where to begin looking) considering that you're the one making the unlikely claims, not me.

Also, the man that Ms. Shaffer shot was NOT an intruder. The man she shot was her live-in fiancee.

Suffice it to say. the entire nation as a whole -- even an area as progressive and educated as Massachusetts -- was not as enlightened about domestic violence in the early 1970s.

 

[MJS]

Cause us girls are supposed to be sugar and spice and everything nice.

True, but then again, I know a few girls that train, who God forbid they were to be attacked, and God help the bad guy is all I can say.

also i was in a situation where i had to use force to get away from the guy and my mind set is, Do whatever is necessary, your aim isnt to hurt someone, its to get away and stay alive and stay safe. If you have to hurt them do it. But only if you have to. and btw. I'm a girl.

True. I mentioned that in an earlier post that not every situation is going to take drastic measures. IMO though, if you're training for SD and you're physically being attacked, then all bets are off and thats not the time to be squeemish about fighting dirty.

 

[fighter_x]

The phrase "fighting dirty" is best left in the ring with sports competitors that have rules and guidelines for competition. Where rule breakers that sneak a thumb jab, or knee a downed opponent are in violation of the rules.

No such thing on the street. It boils down to winning and surviving vs losing and the potential for serious injury. If surviving is dirty, then I fight filthy.

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Also, the man that Ms. Shaffer shot was NOT an intruder. The man she shot was her live-in fiancee.

Suffice it to say. the entire nation as a whole -- even an area as progressive and educated as Massachusetts -- was not as enlightened about domestic violence in the early 1970s.

I don't think it was that case because the woman in question used her Husband's hunting rifle.

I am sure there have many times where a woman fled to the basement in the US.

Fact remains some states are alot better than others when it comes to the legality of defending yourself.

In Florida, you can stand your ground anywhere and use deadly force.

What you can get away with in Texas will get you prison time in NY and many other states. You can kill intruders on your lawn at night, in Va he better be attacking you. In your house, his life is your's.

I can walk down the street in most of Va. with a psitol on my side, but I can;t do that in Maryland and it's still a dark grey area in DC.

Alot of practicle options for SD will get you manslaughter charges in many states.

And then there is the descretion of the first responders. 17 years ago in Florida, I watched my singer hit a crackhead who came at him in the head with a baseball bat. I was sure that when the cops came he was going to jail.
The cops recognized the guy on the ground, one said to the other "Look who it is." and they were both smileing.

They asked my singer "Son telll me you did not hit this guy with a bat?"
"Well sir I.."

"No! Your not hearting me son, tell me you did not hit this guy with a bat."

"Hey kid, did you see him hit this guy?"

" I did'nt see ****, sir."

"You see boy's what we have her is Mutual combatants, aka a fight. No clear victum here and no witness."

"Now tell me your name."

" Cliff Mor.."

"Robert Conway, got it."

10 minutes later
"You boys beat it and thanks."

Total luck there, I guess the cops had delt with this lowlife many times and were glad someone turned him into a retard and were not going to screw up a young man's life for a POS.

 

[sgtmac_46]

The phrase "fighting dirty" is best left in the ring with sports competitors that have rules and guidelines for competition. Where rule breakers that sneak a thumb jab, or knee a downed opponent are in violation of the rules.

No such thing on the street. It boils down to winning and surviving vs losing and the potential for serious injury. If surviving is dirty, then I fight filthy.

On the street if you're not cheating, you're not trying........and if you're fighting fair, you're not being fair to yourself.

The way I look at it is....if he didn't want to get hurt, he shouldn't have come to me.

 

[ETinCYQX]

All of the legal red tape involved makes an even stronger case for my own self defense style: Run-Fu.

 

[Twin Fist]

If surviving is dirty, then I fight filthy.

stealing this

 

[thegatekeeper]

I think the main point here is to use good judgement. I mean, if someone who is unarmed is trying to rob you, it seems over the top to do something like key him in the face. It all depends on the situation.

 

[Cyriacus]

I think the main point here is to use good judgement. I mean, if someone who is unarmed is trying to rob you, it seems over the top to do something like key him in the face. It all depends on the situation.

I assume by Key, You mean Shoot, and not stab with a Key.
In which case, You are correct.
Also, look at Your Body. Where can You be Shot, that mightnt hit something important, and wont cause long term damage, much like Blunt Forced Trauma?
A Bullet to the Head is just the most immediate effect.

Stabbing an Unarmed (How would You know Theyre Unarmed, exactly?) Home Invader with a Key is perhaps safer all-round.

 

[Indagator]

in a survival situation, survival is paramount. beyond that... a grey area.

 

[Chris Parker]

I assume by Key, You mean Shoot, and not stab with a Key.
In which case, You are correct.
Also, look at Your Body. Where can You be Shot, that mightnt hit something important, and wont cause long term damage, much like Blunt Forced Trauma?
A Bullet to the Head is just the most immediate effect.

Stabbing an Unarmed (How would You know Theyre Unarmed, exactly?) Home Invader with a Key is perhaps safer all-round.

To "key" someone's face is similar to keying someone's car, basically using the keys to scratch and attack the face. There's nothing about shooting anyone involved at all.

 

[Cyriacus]

To "key" someone's face is similar to keying someone's car, basically using the keys to scratch and attack the face. There's nothing about shooting anyone involved at all.

I can honestly say Ive never heard that used in its context.
Salutations Good Sir

 

[onthechin]

I would say keep the keys (maybe your car will end up a safe haven). Throwing them at someone would only distract them for a fraction of a second. I would actually question the whole story from the originl poster..why would she be unwilling to hurt the gif she felt seriously threatened? Maybe she was just thinking 'what if?' It's sort of hard to understand if there was a mugging or if they were just talking about it..No-one who feels seriously threatened is going to worry about hurting the other guy. Hve you got a link to this post?

 

[onthechin]

We've all seen enough horror movies where the girls have the axe murderer on the ground unconcious and they all run off, he wakes ups and it starts all over again. In real life would that happen? There are some people who are incapable of hurting another person but how many? Good question

 

[MJS]

I would say keep the keys (maybe your car will end up a safe haven). Throwing them at someone would only distract them for a fraction of a second. I would actually question the whole story from the originl poster..why would she be unwilling to hurt the gif she felt seriously threatened? Maybe she was just thinking 'what if?' It's sort of hard to understand if there was a mugging or if they were just talking about it..No-one who feels seriously threatened is going to worry about hurting the other guy. Hve you got a link to this post?

I saw the OP on MAP. I went back to where I thought I may've seen the thread, but due to this being over a year old, I wasn't going to surf thru endless threads. IMHO, and I believe Chris touched on this earlier, but the current attitude is most likely due to conditioning. The majority of time, people are 'conditioned' to comply, don't do this, don't do that, which could lead to a feeling of just not wanting to hurt someone. Personally, I call BS on that. Sorry, as I've said countless times....if someone is willing to rob, beat, mug, etc, they obviously have no remorse or compassion for you, so why have any for them? We hear all the time about poor upbringings, this line or that line or hardship, but IMO, thats a crutch. I mean really....I find it hard to believe that every single person who's had a rough life, had to resort to a life of crime.

As for using an improvised weapon....sure, I'm all for it. Keys, a pen, a knife, a gun, a rock, whatever....if your *** is on the line, do what you need to do, to survive. Of course, if you're going to use something like a knife or gun or even pepperspray/mace, a) it'd be a very wise idea to get some training in using those tools properly, and b) have them within easy reach. If you have to dig thru your purse to get the gun, well.....

As for throwing something...well, goes back to the improvised weapon. I'm not going to toss my keys, if thats my 1 means of escape. What the hell good is that, if I can't get into my vehicle or start it for that matter? If I'm going to throw something, I want to use something that has the potential of causing injury if it hits the person.

 

[kaizasosei]

hey..
I think that it is one of the most difficult things in life generally to know when the the right time to fight. As a martial artist, you learn many moves so you'd think it would give you more possibilities in reacting with or without regard for the others well being. Mind you, in enough dojos you have plenty of people and socalled instructors with lesser regard for physical and mental wellbeing of others so no telling whats out there, especially after you've smashed it's larynx.
Whatever you do, i say, make it count.

To know when to fight is the subject of much meditation and ponderance on ethics, morals as well as virtues.
The taste of most any fight is never as sweet as one would like to think. The scars that one dishes out are the dangerous ones for the soul and future wellbeing.
However, there are instances where the law condones use of severe force. So i think it would be good to check with the laws of the land and area you live in.