CV's are not the issue here. You made assertions about the mechanics and utility of chokes and strangles with which I and others disagreed. An argument has to stand on its own, not on the qualifications of the person making it. Without verifiable statistical evidence, we have to argue from viewpoints of anecdotal experience.
You brought up your experience of TWC grappling, which I pointed out I shared. Some d!ck measuring went on, but I don't think I started it.
I believe I gave a fair assessment and critique of your video which you can share if you wish, I won't.
I am happy to accept your knowledge of the law in your area as accurate. My earlier criticism of people giving legal advice on the forum was directed generally, not at you specifically. I have no experience or expertise in such matters.
I agree with you gave a fair assessment of the video. I guess I was just remembering another thread where others, not you, said WC has no grappling. it was wrong of me to project in such a manner.
However my description of the technique simply boiled down to a few things. Maybe if I explain them as bullet points it will make more sense.
-part of the issue was semantics. From my training I just don't refer to it as a choke, so when I saw choke I was thinking "air choke." That seemed to be the source of most of the issue.
-When I speak about applying a proper carotid restraint being hard I mean to include the whole process of getting there as well with a fully resisting suspect, not simply the application of the restraint itself. I at least, one on one, find it far easier to set up arm and even leg restraints.
- when I refer to it being dangerous I meant it a few ways. First is because you have to be damn careful not to take it to far and in a real self defense situation it can be hard to stop short of "red lines.". If you cross a red line with this maneuver (vs joint locks) you can cause death and or TBI. Second if that guy zigs instead of zags and/or you screw up it can go REALLY sideways. it's not that the technique is a guaranteed killer its user error and also what
@gpseymour explained better than I could regarding he actions of the "target" making it go sideways.
- legally it can put even civilians on iffy ground due to new legislation. If you black someone out using the technique and the investigators determine a hold like that wasn't justified by the level of force you are confronting you can face not only more serious but additional charges in some jurisdictions.
Because of th I just don't recommend it short of lethal force. This is one of the reasons many LE Agencies have it on the same level as lethal force or ban its use out right.
If you disagree with the above, cool, no biggie, it's just my experience and mileage there varies BUT regardless I suggest people look to the laws of their jurisdiction before using such techniques due to changing laws.
