Is ground and pound ethical?

[Steve]

I'm getting on a 24+ hour plane ride soon, so my communication will be on existent or spotty at best.

But let's start with what I 100 percent agree with. You should not base your morals on the law. Lots of immoral things have been legal in the past.

I myself have done things extremely illegal in certain places on the globe to help people that a gov didn't want helped. I have demonstrated this believe by taking massive risks. So I completely agree with that.

I was never suggesting you do something just because it is legal.

Have a safe flight.

 

[Jimmythebull]

 

[Darren]

With MMA ground and pound has become somewhat acceptable. How does this fit into legal and ethical self-defense?

What conditions do you consider it acceptable? How do you determine when enough forces has been used? How might this look on a cellphone camera? How could this change an altercation from a legal use of force, to excessive force?

What are your guys thoughts on ground and pound for self-defense?

Walked into my dojo once to spar I was going to just throw all kicks to work on my kicking, what I did not know was this dude was into leg destructions so being a dumb *** I threw my kicks, couple of holes in my shins!!! Never seen the dude again ever! I had it in my mind that when I saw him again yeah I was going to ground and pound round and round!!!!! So you come up against one like that GROUND and POUND!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bill Mattocks]

With MMA ground and pound has become somewhat acceptable. How does this fit into legal and ethical self-defense?

What conditions do you consider it acceptable? How do you determine when enough forces has been used? How might this look on a cellphone camera? How could this change an altercation from a legal use of force, to excessive force?

What are your guys thoughts on ground and pound for self-defense?

If attacked, end the threat and leave. End of discussion.

 

[tkdroamer]

LE has protocols it must follow, generally holding them to a higher standard in regard to inflicting harm than civilians are held to. There are guidelines for LTL actions such as pepper spray and Taser. And, yes, cell phone cameras are often not the friend of LE in these anti-police times. Excessive concern for the optics can cause hesitation and second guessing possible administrative/legal results which is dangerous to the arresting officer who is putting himself at risk in the heat of combat.

I think the general public should follow this basic rule: Inflict no more harm than is required to render the assailant unwilling/incapable of continuing the attack. Of course, there is some gray area, IMO, depending on the nature of the attack. Some will need more persuading than others. There will be a point beyond which further pounding the guy is just uncalled for and excessive. Now, if the attacker was assaulting my wife or daughter, or trying to kill me, that point may be pretty far down the line.

This is where my favorite saying applies; you have to know that you know that you know.

 

[Steve]

If attacked, end the threat and leave. End of discussion.

I know you ended the discussion, but there are questions.

This is where my favorite saying applies; you have to know that you know that you know.

sorry. I think @Bill Mattocks ended the discussion.

 

[isshinryuronin]

You can see this in most videos of people being attacked, sucker punched or whatever. The more they try to deescalate by communicating that they will not fight, the more it green lights assaultive behavior from an attacker.

Many times, most times, when a thug threatens you (by words or posture) with imminent bodily harm, he has already formed his intent to hurt you. He is not open to hear your logical or emotional appeal of why it's a bad idea, or civilly discuss with you the pros and cons of beating your a**. One's attempts to do this will only serve as a source of entertainment to him and build his confidence. The case where this may be helpful is when a trained fighter is trying to lull the attacker to lower his guard, thinking he has easy prey, their favorite kind.

"If you seek peace, prepare for war." More often than not, displaying strength, and the will to use it, will prevent aggression. Something many of our leaders seem to forget throughout history.

 

[drop bear]

Many times, most times, when a thug threatens you (by words or posture) with imminent bodily harm, he has already formed his intent to hurt you. He is not open to hear your logical or emotional appeal of why it's a bad idea, or civilly discuss with you the pros and cons of beating your a**. One's attempts to do this will only serve as a source of entertainment to him and build his confidence. The case where this may be helpful is when a trained fighter is trying to lull the attacker to lower his guard, thinking he has easy prey, their favorite kind.

"If you seek peace, prepare for war." More often than not, displaying strength, and the will to use it, will prevent aggression. Something many of our leaders seem to forget throughout history.

I find a civil discussion while I am grounding and pounding the person to be much more convincing.

 

[tkdroamer]

Many times, most times, when a thug threatens you (by words or posture) with imminent bodily harm, he has already formed his intent to hurt you. He is not open to hear your logical or emotional appeal of why it's a bad idea, or civilly discuss with you the pros and cons of beating your a**. One's attempts to do this will only serve as a source of entertainment to him and build his confidence. The case where this may be helpful is when a trained fighter is trying to lull the attacker to lower his guard, thinking he has easy prey, their favorite kind.

"If you seek peace, prepare for war." More often than not, displaying strength, and the will to use it, will prevent aggression. Something many of our leaders seem to forget throughout history.

This is exactly the delicate moment in an encounter where the way it is handled is very different for a LEO. An Officer will have already assessed the situation and the environment, taking into consideration all the possible threats and the level of personal backup. He/she will maintain a level of authority, both verbally and with countenance to maintain control of the situation, usually minimizing physical encounters. If hands-on becomes necessary, it is hard and fast.
The average Joe may decide a hard first strike is the way to go and get in the other guy's face. A more experienced fighter may stand out of range and wait for the other guy to make a move. In this way, whatever intent has already been formed does have as much bearing on the first move.
This can be a rabbit trail of possibilities. Based on experience and training, a person's go-to move will be very different.

 

[Jared Traveler]

Many times, most times, when a thug threatens you (by words or posture) with imminent bodily harm, he has already formed his intent to hurt you. He is not open to hear your logical or emotional appeal of why it's a bad idea, or civilly discuss with you the pros and cons of beating your a**. One's attempts to do this will only serve as a source of entertainment to him and build his confidence. The case where this may be helpful is when a trained fighter is trying to lull the attacker to lower his guard, thinking he has easy prey, their favorite kind.

"If you seek peace, prepare for war." More often than not, displaying strength, and the will to use it, will prevent aggression. Something many of our leaders seem to forget throughout history.

There is a lot more that plays into these encounters. First one can often deselect themselves as a target. Also in almost all cases the build up is extremely important as the attack is still building confidence. The attack is not eminent until it occurs.

 

[isshinryuronin]

The attack is not eminent until it occurs.

We differ here. I consider it imminent when the attacker has formed a committed intent (decision to strike) and is ready, willing and able to execute that intent.

Sometimes this is done prior to approach and sometimes, as you say, takes a little time to "build up." The latter case provides a possibility for de-escalation but is much more difficult in the first case.

 

[tkdroamer]

We differ here. I consider it imminent when the attacker has formed a committed intent (decision to strike) and is ready, willing and able to execute that intent.

Sometimes this is done prior to approach and sometimes, as you say, takes a little time to "build up." The latter case provides a possibility for de-escalation but is much more difficult in the first case.

To add to my previous post about how an officer would have already assessed the situation/attacker, they would have already applied de-escalation tactics as well. It is all part of the evidence building process.

 

[Steve]

The attack is not eminent until it occurs.

We differ here. I consider it imminent when the attacker has formed a committed intent (decision to strike) and is ready, willing and able to execute that intent.

Regarding the topic, you guys seem to have a pretty specific scenario in mind when you're posting, as you refer to thugs, etc. The violence I'm likely to encounter isn't a thug. Well, it might be. But I deal with people who are not rational. Often homeless, often addicted to something, often mentally ill, and often angry about something. The folks I deal with are seldom acting with forethought. They are upset and it's up to me to calm them down. Occasionally, they get violent. I can definitely tell when violence is imminent, and I can assure you all that it is very different in context than a bar fight or a random mugging.

On another note, this may seem very nitpicky, but the meaning of words does matter and can lead to misunderstanding.

Eminent is something that is significant... prominent. It's an old timey word not commonly used. The more common use of this word is to say something is preeminent, to suggest that it is the best in that field (i.e., it stands out among its peers).

Imminent refers to something that is about to happen. If it is occurring, it is (by definition) no longer imminent.

@isshinryuronin 's use of imminent makes more sense... to me, at least.

 

[Hanzou]

In my personal opinion, ground and pound on a hard surface is a level of brutality that I will try to avoid at all costs. Further, there are more humane, effective, and efficient ways to end a confrontation once you have entered that position than turning someone's face and brains into hamburger. That said, I would not say that MMA made ground and pound any more "acceptable" than it already was. If a sociopath gets on top of you, they're going to start hitting you in the face. That's true in 2022, and it was true in 1922, 1822, 1722, and 1022 B.C..

 

[Darren]

In my personal opinion, ground and pound on a hard surface is a level of brutality that I will try to avoid at all costs. Further, there are more humane, effective, and efficient ways to end a confrontation once you have entered that position than turning someone's face and brains into hamburger. That said, I would not say that MMA made ground and pound any more "acceptable" than it already was. If a sociopath gets on top of you, they're going to start hitting you in the face. That's true in 2022, and it was true in 1922, 1822, 1722, and 1022 B.C..

Never ever fight on a hard surface, my head and the cement has already met on many numerous times and occasions!!! At 57 not looking to fight anyway!!! But in my younger years always choose the grass to fight on!!!

 

[Oily Dragon]

Never ever fight on a hard surface, my head and the cement has already met on many numerous times and occasions!!! At 57 not looking to fight anyway!!! But in my younger years always choose the grass to fight on!!!

Sand is best, IMHO.

Snow is a runner up but it depends on the pack.

 

[Darren]

Sand is best, IMHO.

Snow is a runner up but it depends on the pack.

Can see we’re sand would be the idea place, if ya was around it!!! Good suggestion!!!!

 

[tkdroamer]

In my personal opinion, ground and pound on a hard surface is a level of brutality that I will try to avoid at all costs. Further, there are more humane, effective, and efficient ways to end a confrontation once you have entered that position than turning someone's face and brains into hamburger. That said, I would not say that MMA made ground and pound any more "acceptable" than it already was. If a sociopath gets on top of you, they're going to start hitting you in the face. That's true in 2022, and it was true in 1922, 1822, 1722, and 1022 B.C..

Fully agree that the risks have not changed.

I feel it is the takedown that poses the greatest risk. This is a good comment to differentiate MMA and Roman Greco wrestling. When on the ground, I think 'ground and pound' is safer than standing arts, especially from a training aspect. Safer, not necessarily softer.
Doing any of them on a hard surface would escalate the risks, with takedowns and stand-up fighting being at a higher level of order IMHO.
Regardless, there needs to be a controlled environment for training, especially when going hard.

 

[GojuTommy]

By and large it will depend on how long the GnP lasts. 2-3 punches probably. 5+ punches? Probably not.

 

[Tez3]

Never ever fight on a hard surface, my head and the cement has already met on many numerous times and occasions!!! At 57 not looking to fight anyway!!! But in my younger years always choose the grass to fight on!!!

Exactly. I was just thinking about posting to ask if people thought ground and pound is the best way to deal with a situation. Putting aside legalities, ethics and morality should one try to avoid it because it's bad self defence or use it because it works?