Self Defense

[seasoned]

I think the Army has it right when they call their system Combatives. My department still calls our proprietary system Defensive Tactics but being an instructor we drill new recruit officers and veterans alike that we do not wait for someone to hit or attempt to hit us in order to take action.

A small example of this is scenario training with a party who is passive resistive but begins either making statements about fighting/not-going to jail or rolling his hands into fists. If any of these take place and there is reason to go hands on then we can engage in an offensive manner. We do not wait until the other person is set to attack. I hear that Krav is like this as well. There is rumor that we will soon be calling our system Police Combatives but I will believe that when I see it.

When their hands go up defensively, the oc comes out. Their action plus one.

 

[celtic_crippler]

This is another opportuntiy to remind folks to check into, and be aware of the laws where they live.

In my state, someone doesn't have to necessarily take a swing at me for it to be considered "assault" and I am legally within my rights to use force if I percieve aggressive actions or even words as a threat.

For example: If I am addressed by an individual and they say something to the effect of, "I gonna kick your butt" and are within range to commit an attack when they say it, I can flatten their nose before they get the the "..tt" completely out of thier mouth.

I agree whole-heartedly with Lawdog and others that endorce a more aggressive stance on "self-defense." In kenpo, we also follow the principle of "defense-offense/offensive-defense"

In order to help increase one's chances of coming out on top in a confrontation you have to become aggressive, and down-right mean.

Within the kenpo salutation lies the concept of "asking forgiveness if forced to use it." I interpret that as asking forgivenss for having to become uncivilized and animal-like. One has to be more brutal than the aggressor to survive and you can't do that and remain humane at the same time. If you do, then you will likely lose.

You must overwhelm the attacker to end the confrontation quickly and help ensure that you escape without serious injury or worse. The moment you drop your guard or back off without adequately dealing with an attacker you give them another opportunity to harm you and you don't want to give them another chance to hurt or kill you.

Remember, you didn't start it...they did. They chose that path and therefore chose the consequences.

I know that comes off as hard-line to some people, but that's just the reality of it.

The streets aren't a ring and there's no referee to stop the match. Would you rather be the one in control and decides when it's over or do you trust the attacker to back off when you've had enough?

I don't know about you, but I'm not that trusting of someone who's already made it clear they plan on putting me in the hospital or morgue.

 

[Sigung86]

Hello,
I agree, I think...

As long as you do not become the real instigater of the "altercation" I do believe in a strong offense being one of the best defenses.

We live in a society steeped in litigation. You would not wish to be the one "targeted" by the legal boys. I think that is why the term self-DEFENSE is used so often. While there are cases that you are justified in attacking first, I think they are generally in the minority. I think that when one is facing multiple "potential" attackers striking first does have merit. You will, of course, have to prove (if the legal system gets ahold of you) that you felt threatened to the level of "attacking" the group of "miscreants" on some level.

I think I see what you are getting at, and think I agree wholeheartedly.

Good topic, Thank you.
Milt G.

Hi Milt! Long time no talk. I'm kind of leaning toward taking the term self defense out of my "titles"... And changing to self-protection. That's actually more what we have become now-a-days. Many schools using the term "self defense" in their titles don't really teach much of that at all. Kind of like my taking a black belt in under a year in Tang Soo Do, back in 1969 fromt he ROK Army. It was "basic" and vicious with the use of feet and legs. It certainly provided extra tools for my Kenpo conversion in '71.

Now look at what most of the Korean Arts have become, at least in my estimation, and no offense intended to anyone. Much of it appears to be a parody of a fighting art. As a matter of fact, the Boeing Health Insurance Group considers TKD to be a Martial Sport and not a Martial Art.
Yet many of the TKD schools still tout themselves as martial Arts and Self-Defense and so the considered change to Self-Protection.

If you think I'm wrong, it's Okey-Dokey... Please yell at me via private email so's I kin keep my squeeky-clean image. :lool:

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

"Offense is defense and defense is offense" is a simple concept that Gung Fu based systems share. The "as you know someone is going to raise their hands(to fight) You hit them," I doubt very much Sifu was the first to think of that.

Legality is irrevalent in a confrontation in which you have no way of knowing how it will end.

A lot of people are in jail who have felt this way.

 

[LawDog]

Hesitation = hospital / grave.
:rules: