Self-defense training methodology

[Daniel Sullivan]

Why does the soccer mom have to have a basic understanding of primitive self defense skills? I never played soccer, but my mother doesn't have any understanding of physical self defense, and she has never been in an altercation in her life. Neither has my father. Should they take a self defense course? Would it be good for them?

Most people have no immediate need for such skills. They generally have developed habits and lifestyles that minimize their exposure to potential threats. They are aware that such threat exist, but rather than train to physically fight such threats, they place their effort into things that affect them on a more regular basis.

For the most part, if an adult follows all of the advice their mother gave them when they were little, they will probably never need to defend themselves against an unarmed attacker. Against an armed assailant, such as a mugger, most people simply give them their wallet and leave unscathed.

Given the general poor quality of many unarmed defenses against guns and knives, and that the good ones are still highly risky, cooperation is generally considered the best course of action.

Regarding those knife and gun defenses, I don't care how good a program is: if you take a lengthy seminar and annual refresher courses and do not drill them regularly, any unarmed defenses against an armed opponent that you learned will be worse than nothing at all.

If your mom knows no knife or gun defenses, she won't try them if confronted with an armed man demanding her pocketbook. If John Doe attends a forty hour SD class and learns knife and gun defenses and is confronted eight months later by a knife or gun wielding man demanding his wallet, he may decide that "I know knife/gun defenses" and try them, and most likely, end up as a practice dummy for the mugger and later, the emergency room doctor... or the coroner.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Most people have no immediate need for such skills. They generally have developed habits and lifestyles that minimize their exposure to potential threats. They are aware that such threat exist, but rather than train to physically fight such threats, they place their effort into things that affect them on a more regular basis.

I will say again that in the times we live in, any place can be the wrong place and anytime can be the wrong time. Self-defense, as I define it begins long before having to go hands-on. It would always be a good idea to take a course on ways to prevent crime such as home security, while traveling etc. Many local police departments offer this service as a community project. And I will maintain that a good, solid course that offers some basic, gross motor skill principles are a plus and not a negative. I often offered very short duration courses, usually for women at my school. I would stress the prevention side, offer some very basic H2H principles, teach about O.C. and give each student a key chain spray and/or personal alarm for the key chain.

For the most part, if an adult follows all of the advice their mother gave them when they were little, they will probably never need to defend themselves against an unarmed attacker. Against an armed assailant, such as a mugger, most people simply give them their wallet and leave unscathed.

They also used to tell women to submit to the rape and not resist because they wouldn't get hurt if they didn't resist. It doesn't work that way in real life. They still tell people to cooperate with the mugger and not resist so they don't get hurt. It does't work that way in real life. Oh, you might occassionally get the 'gentleman' rapist or mugger that won't hurt you I suppose. And 'official' agencies can't really tell you otherwise becuase they don't want to be responsible. But the fact of the matter is that you are far more likely to get hurt regardless of whether or not you resist and the major factor is drug related.

Listen to me clearly people, I'm very serious about this because I know first-hand because I talk to these people almost daily. Many are NOT in their right mind. If any of you knew just how many 'bad people' are on serious medication you would be dumb-founded! There are normal street drugs, prescription abuse, homemade drugs and now the synthetic drugs sweeping the streets. When these people are high (and they most often are on something during the commission of the crime) they will NOT act like human beings. When you watch the evening news or read the daily paper you are only seeing a fraction of crimes. Most don't make the paper.

Now, I'm not suggesting you walk around like a Ninja, suspecting an attack around every corner. Nor am I suggesting you freak out if someone asks you for the time. What I'm telling you is that violent crime can happen anywhere, anytime, to anyone. And if you've been selected as the potential victim you're going to have to make a choice at some point in the incident. As I've stated before, the mission is survival and the method is whatever it takes to accomplish the mission. The 'method' may be to simply hand over your wallet and the bad guy takes it and runs away. But you better face reality in that you may very well have to fight for your very life. In todays age, which would you think is more likely?

Everyone likes to think it will only happen to 'someone else'. Well....someone has to be that 'someone else'. Situational awareness goes a loooooonnnnngggg way. De-escalation goes a loooonnnnnggg way. Swallowing your pride and walking away when someone has called you a %#$*&(^ goes a looonnnnngggg way.

But you know what? When that fails, a good solid chin jab, eye rake, throat punch or knee to the groin can go a looooonnnngggg way as well. And it doesn't take a whole lot of training or practice. And with respect, I'll maintain that these easily learned gross motor skills will retain their usefulness for a very long time. Does it beat training on a regular basis? No. Does it beat just standing there and being a victim if all other options have been taken away from you to walk away unharmed? Yes.

But...but the person might get hurt if they try to fight back..

Well, if the person is going to hurt you regardless of what you do then at least give yourself a chance. But ultimately it is up to you.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I will say again that in the times we live in, any place can be the wrong place and anytime can be the wrong time.

In the times we live in, violent crime has actually been on the decline in the US. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Self-defense, as I define it begins long before having to go hands-on. It would always be a good idea to take a course on ways to prevent crime such as home security, while traveling etc. Many local police departments offer this service as a community project. And I will maintain that a good, solid course that offers some basic, gross motor skill principles are a plus and not a negative. I often offered very short duration courses, usually for women at my school. I would stress the prevention side, offer some very basic H2H principles, teach about O.C. and give each student a key chain spray and/or personal alarm for the key chain.

You're preaching to the choir on this, but none of this is what I am actually talking about in my previous posts. Perhaps we're talking past eachother on some level.

They also used to tell women to submit to the rape and not resist because they wouldn't get hurt if they didn't resist. It doesn't work that way in real life. They still tell people to cooperate with the mugger and not resist so they don't get hurt. It does't work that way in real life. Oh, you might occassionally get the 'gentleman' rapist or mugger that won't hurt you I suppose. And 'official' agencies can't really tell you otherwise becuase they don't want to be responsible. But the fact of the matter is that you are far more likely to get hurt regardless of whether or not you resist and the major factor is drug related.

Giving up a wallet and submitting to rape do not equate, but regardless, would you please provide some statsics to support this? Not saying that you are wrong, by the way, but people on the web do say a lot of things, often simply repeating what someone else told them but never stopping to consider if it was accurate before passing it along.

Listen to me clearly people, I'm very serious about this because I know first-hand because I talk to these people almost daily. Many are NOT in their right mind. If any of you knew just how many 'bad people' are on serious medication you would be dumb-founded! There are normal street drugs, prescription abuse, homemade drugs and now the synthetic drugs sweeping the streets. When these people are high (and they most often are on something during the commission of the crime) they will NOT act like human beings. When you watch the evening news or read the daily paper you are only seeing a fraction of crimes. Most don't make the paper.

Now, I'm not suggesting you walk around like a Ninja, suspecting an attack around every corner. Nor am I suggesting you freak out if someone asks you for the time. What I'm telling you is that violent crime can happen anywhere, anytime, to anyone. And if you've been selected as the potential victim you're going to have to make a choice at some point in the incident. As I've stated before, the mission is survival and the method is whatever it takes to accomplish the mission. The 'method' may be to simply hand over your wallet and the bad guy takes it and runs away. But you better face reality in that you may very well have to fight for your very life. In todays age, which would you think is more likely?

Everyone likes to think it will only happen to 'someone else'. Well....someone has to be that 'someone else'. Situational awareness goes a loooooonnnnngggg way. De-escalation goes a loooonnnnnggg way. Swallowing your pride and walking away when someone has called you a %#$*&(^ goes a looonnnnngggg way.

But you know what? When that fails, a good solid chin jab, eye rake, throat punch or knee to the groin can go a looooonnnngggg way as well. And it doesn't take a whole lot of training or practice. And with respect, I'll maintain that these easily learned gross motor skills will retain their usefulness for a very long time. Does it beat training on a regular basis? No. Does it beat just standing there and being a victim if all other options have been taken away from you to walk away unharmed? Yes.

But...but the person might get hurt if they try to fight back..

Well, if the person is going to hurt you regardless of what you do then at least give yourself a chance. But ultimately it is up to you.

Again, you're preaching to the choir on much of this. And again, none of this is actually what I am talking about.

What I have been saying is that if you are going to learn a skill that has a physical element that you intend to employ against an assailant who will most likely be either armed or bigger than yourself or both, then you need to train in that skill with resisting opponents regularly in order for it to be worthwhile.

The prevention stuff can be learned at the seminar, put into a packet which can be taken home and the info put immediately into use and practiced daily. It is only the physical skills where I am saying that it is important to have more than just procedural memory.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

In the times we live in, violent crime has actually been on the decline in the US. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Using a quote from one of your previous posts;

Experts can look at the same data and arrive at different conclusions.

I see the jails and prisons with more customers now than when I started my career 21 years ago. Our own county facility has added a 5-story, a 7-story and a 4-story building within that time to house the increase. We're currently around the 4K mark give or take a few here and there. A 1500 bed facility is in the works.

I believe CA was just in the news regarding the need to release thousands back to the street due to over-crowding. And for the most part, criminals get schooled in how to be better criminals while behind bars. And they also cross-train each other in fighting, edged weapons etc.

Just some considerations.

In regards to the SD stuff, I think for many/most the hands on is retained much longer than the class room stuff. We may have to agree to disagree on this, but I stick to what I've seen.

With respect.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Using a quote from one of your previous posts;

Given that you have yet to provide links to any data at all, you might want to hold off on such comments.

In any case, violent crime being down from twenty years ago doesn't mean that things are perfectly safe. It only means that we aren't on our way to living in an 'escape from New York' world.

I see the jails and prisons with more customers now than when I started my career 21 years ago. Our own county facility has added a 5-story, a 7-story and a 4-story building within that time to house the increase. We're currently around the 4K mark give or take a few here and there. A 1500 bed facility is in the works.

I believe CA was just in the news regarding the need to release thousands back to the street due to over-crowding. And for the most part, criminals get schooled in how to be better criminals while behind bars. And they also cross-train each other in fighting, edged weapons etc.

Yes. As I said, you are preaching to the choir on a lot of things.

Just some considerations.

In regards to the SD stuff, I think for many/most the hands on is retained much longer than the class room stuff. We may have to agree to disagree on this, but I stick to what I've seen.

With respect.

Again, please provide some kind of support for this. I have asked several times. Not an unreasonable request, given that what you say runs counter to conventional logic regarding retention of material.

Daniel

 

[oftheherd1]

In the times we live in, violent crime has actually been on the decline in the US. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
...
Looking at the statistics you provided, I see problems. They don't seem to agree. In the crimes per 100,00, (the second two lines) the only crime that has gone down is murder. I don't know which is correct.

Forcible Aggravated Larceny- Vehicle
Year Population Total Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft
1960 179,323,175 3,384,200 288,460 3,095,700 9,110 17,190 107,840 154,320 912,100 1,855,400 328,200
2009 307,006,550 10,639,369 1,318,398 9,320,971 15,241 89,000 408,217 806,843 2,196,971 6,327,320 794,616

1960 179,323,175 1,887.2 160.9 1,726.3 5.1 9.6 60.1 86.1 508.6 1,034.7 183.0
2009 307,006,550 3,465.5 429.4 3,036.1 5.0 28.7 133.0 262.8 716.3 2,060.9 258.8

Giving up a wallet and submitting to rape do not equate,

No they don't as to the normal initial physical and mental harm, but I took his point to be the violence subsequent to the commission of the original crime. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

but regardless, would you please provide some statsics to support this? Not saying that you are wrong, by the way, but people on the web do say a lot of things, often simply repeating what someone else told them but never stopping to consider if it was accurate before passing it along.

See my 1st comment.
...

What I have been saying is that if you are going to learn a skill that has a physical element that you intend to employ against an assailant who will most likely be either armed or bigger than yourself or both, then you need to train in that skill with resisting opponents regularly in order for it to be worthwhile.

The prevention stuff can be learned at the seminar, put into a packet which can be taken home and the info put immediately into use and practiced daily. It is only the physical skills where I am saying that it is important to have more than just procedural memory.

In many ways I want to, and do, agree with you on the above two paragraphs. I think it wrong to take some quicky course and leave thinking you can now conquer the entire world. Some practice, preferably physical, but at least mental, will be helpful if not necessary. Still, I have experienced training (Not martial arts, it had to do with an emergency situation while parachuting.) which kicked in without my conscienous knowledge, over two years after I took the training.

Daniel

Just some thoughts of mine. :asian:

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

In regards to the SD stuff, I think for many/most the hands on is retained much longer than the class room stuff. We may have to agree to disagree on this, but I stick to what I've seen.

Again, please provide some kind of support for this. I have asked several times. Not an unreasonable request, given that what you say runs counter to conventional logic regarding retention of material.

Incidentally, this is not a challenge or a debate tactic.

Seriously, as an instructor, if there is a better and easier way of teaching material, I am all for it and would be interested.

However, personal experience and the overwhelming majority of teaching methodology differ in this regard.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Hands on retention rates are vastly superior to lecture retention rates. This has been commonly known in LE and military circles for many decades. This is why we have so many hands-on drills that are scenario based such as the 'green room' and the FATS machine (FireArms Training System).

http://www.agr.wa.gov/PestFert/docs/P10PestNotes2002.pdf

http://www.ehow.com/info_8240384_pros-handson-training.html

http://www.tenouk.com/learningretentionrate.html

I've seen this with my son since we homeschool. He does very well remembering from lecture and reading. But when combined with visual the retention rate increases dramatically. When combined with something hand-on such as a science experiment the retention rate is phenominal. I remember when he had his first evaluation after completing the first grade. The teacher/evaluator asked him 'what happens to the sun at night'? She later said that 1st graders typically have responses like 'the sun turns off' or 'it goes into the ocean' etc. My son goes into a 10 minute disertation on how the earth rotates on its axis while orbiting the sun etc. She looked at him and then looked to me with a big smile. I explained to her that in addition to the reading material for science, I have a telescope and we put together a model of the solar system. So I'm convinced that hands-on will always trump just lecture-only for the majority of people.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Okay, maybe we are on two separate pages. I have no dispute with you regarding hands on being more easily retained than lecture.

The question has been about a long seminar followed up with annual or once every eighteen month refreshers being adequate.

As for classroom stuff, no MA class that I have ever been a part of has had much in the way of lecture.

It doesn't matter to me how hands on it is; in my experience, such a format (seminar + annual refreshers) is insufficient to internalize techniques that you will need to use in a violent encounter.

Daniel

 

[Buka]

Maybe I'll check back later when the pi**ing contest stops and the self defense discussion starts.

Yes, I know, I'm new and should keep quiet. (Point taken) But, perhaps the sharing of thoughts might be a better way to go.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Maybe I'll check back later when the pi**ing contest stops and the self defense discussion starts.

Pi**ing contest??

Yes, I know, I'm new and should keep quiet. (Point taken) But, perhaps the sharing of thoughts might be a better way to go.

Perhaps instead of mock self pity in response to a point that has not been made (and thus cannot be taken), you should take your own advice and actually engage in the sharing of thoughts.

I cannot speak for others here, but I judge posts on their quality, not on the length of time that the poster has been a member.

If you feel that you have something worth saying, just say it.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Maybe I'll check back later when the pi**ing contest stops and the self defense discussion starts.

Yes, I know, I'm new and should keep quiet. (Point taken) But, perhaps the sharing of thoughts might be a better way to go.

Daniel and I aren't in a pissing contest. As far as I've understood, we have a mutual respect towards each other that doesn't change based on whether we agree on a particular point. I offer this as a clarification and invite your input on SD training methodology.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Daniel and I aren't in a pissing contest. As far as I've understood, we have a mutual respect towards each other that doesn't change based on whether we agree on a particular point. I offer this as a clarification and invite your input on SD training methodology.

Indeed.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Okay, maybe we are on two separate pages. I have no dispute with you regarding hands on being more easily retained than lecture.

The question has been about a long seminar followed up with annual or once every eighteen month refreshers being adequate.

As for classroom stuff, no MA class that I have ever been a part of has had much in the way of lecture.

It doesn't matter to me how hands on it is; in my experience, such a format (seminar + annual refreshers) is insufficient to internalize techniques that you will need to use in a violent encounter.

Daniel

Ahh, I see now where I've gone off the page :rtfm: My bad.

In regards to the question at hand i.e. training in a seminar format followed by periodic training; This is the format that is almost exclusively followed for 'most' LE agencies that I'm familar with. For example, firearms training and D.T. training is around 100+ hours in an academy setting followed by annual in-service training that can be anywhere from 16-40 hours. Or, an in-service specialty program followed by anywhere from 8-40 hours annually or perhaps as long as 18 or even 24 months.

Now, to be clear, more frequent training will always be a plus. And again to be clear, not every Officer, Deputy, Trooper or Agent is going to take it upon themselves to train more frequently. Those that do are often the exception rather than the rule.

However...

Depending o the training, programs such as S.P.E.A.R., Boatman's Edeged Weapon or the ISI Israeli Instinctive shooting has shown to have a very high retention rate for the 'average' user that only recieves the initial block of instruction followed by infrequent, periodic training. As I've mentioned (I think in this thread) our agency has documented on-duty incidents involving the above mentioned training by users that don't train frequently. Such programs are gross motor skill based. The initial training is in some cases....well intense isn't the word, perhaps severe would be a better term. Remember, we're not talking about learning a complicated skill set. We're talking simple, gross motor skills that are very easily learned. I can't post a link to a website that shows a % for our agency or those within our circle of influence or those in GB. It is just understood from internal reports and field observations.

Now take a look at it from another perspective. Agencies do not have an unlimited budget. I can't speak for all agencies but our agency (and those in our area of influence) seek to get the greatest bang for the buck. That is why the programs mentioned in this thread get chosen by so many agencies. Take S.P.E.A.R. for example, it is taught in and out of North America to L.E., Military, Govt. etc for a reason. It is simple, effective and has an established track record. It isn't a super-secret-ninja-death-touch program, but it is simple and effective. LE and Corrections have been using this type of training, in our area, for over 15 years now. So much so that it is now part of in-service training even for those that didn't take the initial block of instruction.

Now will it work for someone that doesn't take the training seriously? No, probably not. Will it work for someone that, to be blunt, is too much of a pansy to do what is necessary to employ the skills learned? No, probably not. But I am surrounded by professionals that have received no more training than what has been provided by the agency, that took it seriously, and have used it in the field successfully. It doesn't make them super-cops, but it has provided an adequate platform for successful defense. The rest is on the individual and their mind set.

 

[Buka]

My apologies if I offended in any way, it was not my intent.

As for methodologies of Self Defense, I think we should diffrentuate between “student levels” when talking self defense.

Self Defense training should cover a lot of aspects. The first, in my opinion, should be a look at the legal and ethical questions of self defense. “Using force”, as it were.

“Gut feeling” is probably the best thing we have to warn againt trouble. However, “gut feeling” is a difficult thing to bring into a courtroom. And a courtroom is where any serious, physical aspect of self defense is likely to end up.

As for the training itself, it has been my experience that too many courses rely first and formost on battle, when they should be first focusing on escape and avoidance. A good course on self defense should also tailor itself to young males if, indeed, there a lot of young males as students. It should address ego, and how your ego can work against you, it should address “social behavior among young males” as opposed to real world suprise attack, and how to avoid both. Again, I think the emphasis should be on avoidance and recognizing the signs of social behavior and escalation.

If there are a lot of women in the course, women who have no background in self defense, martial arts, security or law enforcement, the course should be several months long. I think anything shorter than that is a waste of time. I no longer believe in “women's self defense courses”.

I think a good course should cover the bad guy, that is “intent”, “means”, and ”opportunity”. And how you, or your attorney, would articulate that in court. The time to find that out is not after the fact, but before.

I think a good course on self defense should cover physiology as well as the capacity one might or might not have to injure, maim or kill a fellow human being.

As for the physical.....this is a tough question. Martial Arts are usually specific in their training. They present the student with values not usually associated with street people. Sometimes these differences are two languages and the Martial artist is the one that suffers. Martial Arts usually presents the student with a “proper distance” that that particular art takes place in. That distance is usually different in self defense. And the speed is different. I believe a well trained Martial Artist has more speed or quickness than most, if not all, street hoods. However, and this is a big however, most Martil Artists are ill prepared for the swiftness of an initial attack. They have trouble regrouping after that first blitz because they are not used to the violent and unexpected timing.

Also, as the old saying goes, “if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.” I don't think most Artists are well prepared for the determination of a dirty tactician. Ex cons, on the other hand – it's all they know.

I don't have any particular answers to how all this can be taught in a "course". But I believe it should be.

Again, I apologize if I offended anyone with my last post.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

As for the training itself, it has been my experience that too many courses rely first and formost on battle, when they should be first focusing on escape and avoidance. A good course on self defense should also tailor itself to young males if, indeed, there a lot of young males as students. It should address ego, and how your ego can work against you, it should address “social behavior among young males” as opposed to real world suprise attack, and how to avoid both. Again, I think the emphasis should be on avoidance and recognizing the signs of social behavior and escalation.

I think a good course on self defense should cover physiology as well as the capacity one might or might not have to injure, maim or kill a fellow human being.

Also, as the old saying goes, “if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.” I don't think most Artists are well prepared for the determination of a dirty tactician. Ex cons, on the other hand – it's all they know.

To begin, welcome to the board and thank you for your contribution to the thread

I'd like to touch on some of the points you've made because I think they're valid take home points. I'll quote from my original post (so I don't have to type it all again);

To begin with, most types of sport traing/competions revolve around some/most/all of the following considerations (be they TKD specific or a more general MMA).

• Has a referee that enforces rules that both parties are required to abide by for the match.
• The match is in a well-lit, dry, level, soft venue.
• The opponent is unarmed.
• The opponent is alone with no chance others will join in.
• Some sort of safety gear is usually involved i.e. cup, mouth piece, gloves etc.
• The opponent isn't trying to kill, maim or severely injure you.
• You get a break in-between rounds to catch your breath, get a drink, get some advice or a pep talk.
• If you've had enough, you can call a time out or tap out or simply quit and walk away.
• There is often an incentive or reward for competing and/or winning such as rank advancement, a prize or maybe cash.

As a comparison, self-defense training is for situations;

• Situational awareness i.e. be aware of your surroundings.
• Factors such as avoidance, evasion, escape and de-escalation need to be taken into consideration and trained for where appropriate.
• Where there is no referee enforcing rules.
• You are likely alone and/or at some sort of a place or position of disadvantage.
• There are no rules.
• There are no breaks, water, advice or anything to assist you.
• The assault can occur in a parking lot, elevator, side street, your car, your bedroom, in the woods etc. It will likely occur in dim light conditions in any type of weather.
• The attacker may be armed, and should be assumed to be armed.
• The attacker may have friends more than willing to jump in.
• There is no safety gear, but likely a plethora of person-unfriendly objects like broken glass, traffic, walls etc.
• The attacker is looking to cause as much damage to you as humanly possible in the shortest amount of time possible.
• To quit is to die (or something possibly worse i.e. rape, love one killed etc)
• The goal is survival, the method is whatever it takes and is appropriate to the situation.

When looking at the difference in training methodologies, consider for the student and scenario;

• Do they always 'go for the knock-out', for points, for a submission? Is so, they've limited there response options.
• Do they have the option and/or opportunity to avoid or evade the potential conflice. Or escape or practice an verbal de-escalation skills?
• Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?
• Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?
• Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?
• Is the student required to observe certain rules?
• Do your students always train inside the Dojang? Are opportunities provided to train inside a vehicle, stairs, elevator, hallway, small room, on grass, on asphalt, on a sloping or wet or slippery surface?
• Do your students always wear their uniform? Are they familar with what it would be like to be wearing tight clothing, foot wear, shorts and a T-shirt, a dress etc? Tt is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang. It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.
• Have they ever trained in dim light conditions?
• Have they trained with visual/auditory distractions?
• Do we always use a closed fist when striking at the head while wearing gloves and padded helmets? A blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation may not be the wisest tactic. The chance of injuring the hand on someone’s head is fairly substantial even with a well-placed strike. That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves. I'll say it again; the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial. If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD. Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles? Or a cell phone, or car keys? I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time. Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face. And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.
  
  This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathogens the bad guy may be carrying. And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.
• Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the state statutes of force and deadly force? In consideration like bodily harm, great bodily harm and/or death? Subject factors? What a reasonable person would do in the same situation? Are you required to retreat in your state? Does your state have a 'Castle Doctrine'? An instructor doesn't need to be an attorney, but providing the resources for the student to check into it and touching on some of the topics during class time.
  
  Is the student (or the instructor) well versed in the O.O.D.A. loop? Fight or flight? Flinch resonse? Adrenaline responses such as tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, loss of manual dexterity in the extremities? Considerations can include;
• Even powerful strikes in non-lethal areas can fail.
• A situation which starts out at less-than-lethal levels can quickly escalate.
• A proper joint lock, at the appropriate time, 'can' immobilize even an EDP (emotionally disturbed person) even if strikes fail and if properly applied.
• Be as patient as possible for the situation, look for openings.
• The attack will probably take place at the most advantageous time to the attacker and the least advantageous to us. We may be tired, sick, distracted etc yet still be forced into a situation.
• Some of these predators come in packs which backs them bold. And even being physically big isn't always a deterent.

And a SD course can make the same mistake as a sport-oriented course by failing to address these aspects of self-defense. As I've said before, fighting isn't the plan, fighting is what you do when the plan fails.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

As for the training itself, it has been my experience that too many courses rely first and formost on battle, when they should be first focusing on escape and avoidance. A good course on self defense should also tailor itself to young males if, indeed, there a lot of young males as students. It should address ego, and how your ego can work against you, it should address “social behavior among young males” as opposed to real world suprise attack, and how to avoid both. Again, I think the emphasis should be on avoidance and recognizing the signs of social behavior and escalation.

Absolutely. If all boys learned this lesson, prisons would probably be less densely populated.

Again, I apologize if I offended anyone with my last post.

No offense taken from my end. Glad you jumped in!

Daniel

 

[oftheherd1]

...

It doesn't matter to me how hands on it is; in my experience, such a format (seminar + annual refreshers) is insufficient to internalize techniques that you will need to use in a violent encounter.

Daniel

While I agree with the post above yours, and I don't think most of us would disagree, I also agree with you in that my understanding was the difference between fairly constant exposure in a dojo versus one training session followed by yearly or so followup training.

Please correct us if we are wrong, Kong Soo Do, so we can more corrrect discussion of your points.

EDIT: Distractions at work and half brain dead; I didn't get to the end of the posts. Thanks for your clarification.

BUKA - I am curious why women would need months of courses? For the type of hands-on, 8-10 hours a day, I don't see anyone needing more based on gender. I am asking as your comment seems sexist, and I don't really think you meant it to be. I just thought it might be worth clarifying before you got flamed.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

While I agree with the post above yours, and I don't think most of us would disagree, I also agree with you in that my understanding was the difference between fairly constant exposure in a dojo versus one training session followed by yearly or so followup training.

It doesn't even have to be in a dojo environment. It can be regular training, perhaps with once a week or even once a month check up/refreshers.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Outside of the dojo/dojang environment would be very beneficial. I always encourage a wide variety of locals and circumstances.