Problems with pressure points.

[drop bear]

How is a pressure point any help when your attacker is on your back?

If your arm thingy works then it could help to peel an arm off your neck.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Actually, if they're on your back you're likely screwed already. My point is that you could use it in a non-dominant position to get out easier.

If it works in a non-dominant position, why would it not work in a dominant position and a neutral position, as well?

 

[KangTsai]

If it works in a non-dominant position, why would it not work in a dominant position and a neutral position, as well?

I did say it works in a dominant position, and is a good submission move at times. I would prefer different methods in a neutral position.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I did say it works in a dominant position, and is a good submission move at times. I would prefer different methods in a neutral position.

Why?

 

[Balrog]

That last point is key. There's one nerve nexus on the forearm that I love. My students hate it...because I love it so much.

Because I use it a lot, I grab it entirely by habit now. In an aggressive fight, I would still grab it, simply because that's what I do. It probably won't have much effect. However, sometimes I use it for striking. Hitting it right will temporarily weaken the grip (it stuns the nerves that control those muscles), and can be hit with a hammerfist. That application of it is more useful under an assault, since it provides two benefits (the actual hit to the muscle, plus whatever stun you get to the nerves) with a gross-motor movement.

That's the radial nerve strike. One of my favorites as well.

 

[Balrog]

Assault is a legal term, a better way to express your point would be both are fighting, self defense being the legally justified form of fighting. I say this because, in my State, I can arrest two people for "Simple Assault by mutual fighting."

How it looks can matter, at least the aftermath. A knife hand isn't in and of itself a deadly move, but a knife hand to the throat is a potentially deadly move. This is why it is important to train not just in techniques but in knowing under what circumstances such techniques can be used.

When we get into discussions about self-defense, I like to use the Use Of Force Continuum as a guideline. It helps to illustrate the concept of "as peaceably as possible, as forcibly as necessary". This was developed originally for police but it works quite well for civilians.

In a nutshell, whatever the aggressor on the left is displaying, the defender on the right can respond at the same level or one higher to control the situation. In my school, we define controlling the situation as making it possible to escape to a place of safety and call for help.

It's a good teaching tool.

 

[Juany118]

When we get into discussions about self-defense, I like to use the Use Of Force Continuum as a guideline. It helps to illustrate the concept of "as peaceably as possible, as forcibly as necessary". This was developed originally for police but it works quite well for civilians.

In a nutshell, whatever the aggressor on the left is displaying, the defender on the right can respond at the same level or one higher to control the situation. In my school, we define controlling the situation as making it possible to escape to a place of safety and call for help.

It's a good teaching tool.

The only thing I would question is "as peaceably as possible." You actually don't have to concern yourself with using the "minimal amount of force necessary", your force simply needs to be objectively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances. That may not be what you meant by "as peaceably..." but it did create that impression.

The UoF continuum is indeed a useful guide if you know how to use it. Example, it is not a series of steps you must progress through, you can simply "jump" immediately to the necessary level.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That's the radial nerve strike. One of my favorites as well.

The very one!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The only thing I would question is "as peaceably as possible." You actually don't have to concern yourself with using the "minimal amount of force necessary", your force simply needs to be objectively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances. That may not be what you meant by "as peaceably..." but it did create that impression.

The UoF continuum is indeed a useful guide if you know how to use it. Example, it is not a series of steps you must progress through, you can simply "jump" immediately to the necessary level.

I use similar wording when I'm teaching this concept to students. I'll say something like, "And I'll use the least amount of force that lets me go home. The problem is I don't know for sure what that is, so I can't reach for the least amount of force possible, but have to go with the least amount of force that seems to provide for sure survival." The difference between those two concepts is big. If someone takes a drunken swing at me, and can barely stand, I can safely assume (yes, I know, he might be pretending to be drunk, but I don't usually face assassins) that a small amount of force will control the situation. If someone comes at me violently, there are few assumptions I can safely make, so I will respond much harder - not limited just by what will likely work, but building a reasonable margin for safety, as well.

 

[Juany118]

I use similar wording when I'm teaching this concept to students. I'll say something like, "And I'll use the least amount of force that lets me go home. The problem is I don't know for sure what that is, so I can't reach for the least amount of force possible, but have to go with the least amount of force that seems to provide for sure survival." The difference between those two concepts is big. If someone takes a drunken swing at me, and can barely stand, I can safely assume (yes, I know, he might be pretending to be drunk, but I don't usually face assassins) that a small amount of force will control the situation. If someone comes at me violently, there are few assumptions I can safely make, so I will respond much harder - not limited just by what will likely work, but building a reasonable margin for safety, as well.

Yeah I kinda used to use that terminology too but I just went through 6 credit hours of UoF stuff. They really frown on using the word "least" because history of UoF incidents (in LE) has shown using that term causes hesitation due to second guessing and low balling the amount of force to be used, both of which get people hurt. So they started hammering on the idea of just making sure it's "objectively reasonable.". It may sound like semantics but often words can have a major effect of a thought process.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah I kinda used to use that terminology too but I just went through 6 credit hours of UoF stuff. They really frown on using the word "least" because history of UoF incidents (in LE) has shown using that term causes hesitation due to second guessing and low balling the amount of force to be used, both of which get people hurt. So they started hammering on the idea of just making sure it's "objectively reasonable.". It may sound like semantics but often words can have a major effect of a thought process.

That's a good point, and useful insight. Thanks!

 

[Balrog]

The only thing I would question is "as peaceably as possible." You actually don't have to concern yourself with using the "minimal amount of force necessary", your force simply needs to be objectively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances. That may not be what you meant by "as peaceably..." but it did create that impression.

The UoF continuum is indeed a useful guide if you know how to use it. Example, it is not a series of steps you must progress through, you can simply "jump" immediately to the necessary level.

Agreed. It's the entire concept of "what would a reasonable person do in this situation?" And as we all know, there is no such thing as reason in a courtroom.

However, if I ever have to explain myself to a jury, I think that phrase would be highly effective. I could then explain it in terms of the UoF continuum. Something like "he punched at me; I blocked it and knocked him down with a brachial stun", which would be an equivalent use of force.