To Control Or Not To Control..That Is The Question.

[MJS]

I have remained respectful despite the badgering being done becuase of my postition... It seems to rear its ugly head in every thread.
I have thanked you several times in several posts for a reason MJS... There is no reason for you to approach me in the manner you are.
This is not about deuling over verbage or terminology. Its about intel and info.
I understand where you are coming from. However, I choose to bypass all of the things outside and work from the meat...rather than going outside in by working through the tool and getting to the real task at hand...I would rather work from the inside out and get to the real threat which is a thinking moving person.... the brain and body behind the function... not the tool front.
Clearly, this is my approach and I am not the only one but its my cross to bear... likewise, there are others with a different approach and that is thiers cross to bear... to me its just a man effected by serial injuries that happened to be weilding a tool.... I would rather focus on crushing his throat, breaking his knee and cracking his spine than what technique I can use to get that tool...
I have accepted being cut or stabbed from the get go and infact I may not even know it when it happens...it may have already happened... regardless... my focus shouldnt change or shift to the tool or even bypassing the tool... the focus is serial injury to a non-functional state.


focus on injury to control the function of the brain and body... not focus on controling the tool itself... injury is the deciding factor on either side... if you are not doing it... it will be done to you...

I have never represented my opinion as superior... but when it comes to the game of life and death I will not accept anything less than my success in dropping them where they stand... not with some magic voodoo prowess or some super spec ops secret fighting technique...but with the tool of violence... which declares no technique or style.

I am most concerned with what I can do buck-naked rather than what I can do with snap on tools... likewise I am more concerned with what they can do as a moving thinking human than what they can do with snap on tools...


you like apples...I like oranges...

lets agree we disagree and move on... but dont goad and taunt people becuase they disagree... we are here to learn not spread infection...

Once again... I post here for a reason and its not becuase of anything other than the professionalism of most of its member base... If I want childish mouth frothing rants I can log-in to warriortalk and throw rocks at the angry mob with pitch forks and torches... I dont come on here to contribute and do my part in that regard and no more, no less. I expect to receive the same courtesy as I give no more, no less. typing posts defaming people or downsizing them to mall-ninja wannabees that extracted all thier knowledge from magazines is not a judgement anyone here is in a position to make. Regardless of what your perception of ones experience is...or wether or not you feel thier background or lack of is substantial enought to destroy meat in the face of danger... It doesnt matter... wether a seasoned killer on the battlefield or life long practicioner who has never been positioned to take a life...it doesnt matter... respect everyone equally... regardless... there is no excuse to behave otherwise short of plain ignorance...

Of course this statement is entirely generalized and applicable to all who apply...if any apply.

I respect everyone and carry myself in that fashion... no need to condesend or disrespect me because I wont just sit and take it....
I get to the point without the sugary toppings... if I agreed with everyone and everything... well then, that would be very substantial in terms of my individuality...

In the end.. you do what you train...



and again...



to each his own...


I wish everyone the best in their endeavors

I feel that while things have been a bit heated, I've been civil. Likewise, I've thanked you in a few of your posts as well. I've said many times, while talking about my take on these subjects, that people are free to do as they choose. I don't claim that my methods are superior. However, I do find it interesting that I've pointed to many sources, all of which are in line with what I've been saying. But again, to each his own. Perhaps its just in the reading, vs. seeing things real time, but I can't help but to interpret many of your posts as hinting that your methods are the only ones that will work.

In an effort to better understand your views, let me ask you this question. Going on what you've said in many posts, I am reading that you focus more on taking out the person instead of controlling the weapon. Your theory is if you take out the person, the weapon can't hurt you. Am I correct so far?

Going on what you've said, I'm picturing an entry such as a straightblast, to overwhelm the opponent with strikes to various areas, ie: eyes, throat, groin, etc. Am I correct in this? If not, please clarify your exact method of how you enter.

Assuming that I'm correct with the straightblast theory, I will agree that this is a good method, as I've used it during sparring sessions and it does open up the chance to clinch and work close range strikes, ie: elbows, knees, headbutts, etc. If we do take any strikes on the way into the SB, they're nothing more than empty handed strikes.

Now, lets put a blade into the picture. Let us assume that the badguy is slashing at us, alternating between inward and outward slashes. Obviously there is now more to worry about than just an empty handed hit. So, going on this, how do YOU enter in on the person? Do you consider the knife at all? Do you consider that your strikes may not take the person out as planned? Do you have a backup plan? If so, what is it? Do you take into consideration that the BG still has a weapon, still has control over it, and can still use it against you? I think its safe to say that he will probably not stand there and let you attack him, without attempting to use his weapon.

I look forward to your reply.

 

[Sukerkin]

All I can add from my experience with Japanese swordsmanship is that, even when similarly armed, the times when we 'lay hands' on the other swordsman involve controlling the sword to our advantage.

"What about Aikido?" I hear the cry - aye, I think that is the art that shows us that when facing an armed opponent then the thing that is formost is to control the weapon whilst you work on disabling the wielder.

Aside: Mind you, at the risk of upsetting every Aikidoka in the world, I have said before and still maintain that Aikido is a last ditch defensive art which depends for it's success upon the swordsman being less skilled than the Aikido practitioner. If no openings are presented then there is nothing to work with.

 

[morph4me]

Aside: Mind you, at the risk of upsetting every Aikidoka in the world, I have said before and still maintain that Aikido is a last ditch defensive art which depends for it's success upon the swordsman being less skilled than the Aikido practitioner. If no openings are presented then there is nothing to work with.

Speaking as an Aikidoka, if you have a sword and I'm empty handed, and provided there's and opportunity availiable. You're going to have to catch me before you can cut me, and I'm going to depend on my adreneline, and the fact that you'll be slipping in the trail that I'm leaving, to help me survive.

 

[Sukerkin]

:lol: I think that's what is known as a most sensible and pragmatic attitude :tup:.

 

[MJS]

I'm going to slightly change the focus of this thread. Until now, we've been talking about attacks in which there is alot of movement. In other words, someone trying to hit you with a club, someone trying to slash or stab at you with a blade. The weapon, whatever it may be, is moving.

What I'd like to focus on for a moment is a static attack. Now, before anyone thinks that I'm talking about moving like some robot, I'm talking about a mugging scenario. You're at the ATM, guy comes up behind you, and presses a blade into your back, demanding cash. You turn around, badguy is there, he grabs you, slams you into a wall, and with his other hand, presses the blade against your throat.

I have my own theories, which I will share later. I'm interested in hearing from those who do not advocate as much control of the weapon as I have been talking about in my posts.

Looking forward to your replies.

 

[BLACK LION]

I feel that while things have been a bit heated, I've been civil. Likewise, I've thanked you in a few of your posts as well. I've said many times, while talking about my take on these subjects, that people are free to do as they choose. I don't claim that my methods are superior. However, I do find it interesting that I've pointed to many sources, all of which are in line with what I've been saying. But again, to each his own. Perhaps its just in the reading, vs. seeing things real time, but I can't help but to interpret many of your posts as hinting that your methods are the only ones that will work. My purpose here is not to solidify some preaching into doctrine. I do have confidence and a particular combative mindset that stands out but it should not be mistaken for some sort of force feeding...especially in an internet forum. I understand your position and I have been there and trained in that fashion but I chose a different path. I know there are many references that line up with what you convey and I understand that is the path you are on. Let it serve you well.
I am only a vessel and in no way the ultimate source in these facets of combat. I am not the source. However I am an instrument and clearly I play a different tune. I offer my perception which is based on factual data... not fantasy warrior mumbo jumbo. You offer your perception which is based on factual data and not some fantasy warrior mumbo jumo. So lets learn... and understand... as students... as warriors...

In an effort to better understand your views, let me ask you this question. Going on what you've said in many posts, I am reading that you focus more on taking out the person instead of controlling the weapon. Your theory is if you take out the person, the weapon can't hurt you. Am I correct so far? I have to assume I will be whacked,stabbed or shot but what I cannot allow is it to be repeated. I can not remain in an effected state or I will be blugeoned-stabbed or shot to death. Can it hurt me...sure...but if I can still think and move hes done. Most often a person who has been stabbed doesnt realize it becuase they never saw the balde...they report that they were punched.
It only becomes a weapon when a driving body utilizes it with violent intent. If it sits there untouched it is an in-animate object. I focus on taking them out, yes. I focus on certified injuries. I focus on disconnecting the brain from the body and severing the ability to think and move. If I injure them, they are too busy with that injury to put the tool to use. My goal is serial injuries to keep them in an serially effected state until they are non-funtional. no motor function no tool... no brain function no tool. In the end he is just a man who whas beaten to non-functional while holding a tool.

Going on what you've said, I'm picturing an entry such as a straightblast, to overwhelm the opponent with strikes to various areas, ie: eyes, throat, groin, etc. Am I correct in this? If not, please clarify your exact method of how you enter. Agression utilizing the length of ones inseam is stressed regardless of the angle. The available targets will determine the angle of entry. There is always rotation and we are always looking to get through thier base and replace thier body with ours when striking. A straight blast is a bit different as it is not designed to pull fthier foundation out from under them by stepping through them when striking. I am not seeking to overwhelm them with punches or a flurry of any kind. I am looking for slow, smooth methodical targeting to ensure success in activating the reflex reaction associated with bonafide injury. I trained speed for many years based on what I was taught... I became very successful in being faster than my opponent. Things have changed and I understand speed to equal fear. The fear that the very last thing I did wasnt good enough. I had the perception that violence is chaos and it isnt... its simple..its deliberate..its injury.

Assuming that I'm correct with the straightblast theory, I will agree that this is a good method, as I've used it during sparring sessions and it does open up the chance to clinch and work close range strikes, ie: elbows, knees, headbutts, etc. If we do take any strikes on the way into the SB, they're nothing more than empty handed strikes. I strike with my body weight behind my body weapons. I line up my hard parts with thier soft parts and smash through them. Once again. I am not seeking speed combos or a flurry. I am seeking deliberate targets to destroy so set them up for the next and the next... I am looking for destruction... not to compete with speed and technique.

Now, lets put a blade into the picture. Let us assume that the badguy is slashing at us, alternating between inward and outward slashes. Obviously there is now more to worry about than just an empty handed hit. So, going on this, how do YOU enter in on the person? Knife is moving faster than his body...pick the nearest target and wreck it. Do you consider the knife at all?I consider his body in relation to it, working inside out. Do you consider that your strikes may not take the person out as planned?I have faith in injuries but not singular ones... I must remain in a serial cause state and them in a serial effect state until non-functionality is achieved. Do you have a backup plan? If so, what is it? Repeat injury till satisfied... this can equate to me stabbing them with my own blade(carry without fail everyday)Do you take into consideration that the BG still has a weapon, still has control over it, and can still use it against you? I think its safe to say that he will probably not stand there and let you attack him, without attempting to use his weapon. Not if I am the one causing injuries... he has no choice over his reactions... its not a concious thought.... the spine has the first say and it will react to stimulus before the brain has a chance to reason.... if this wasnt so... we would all be missing fingers and have burned up hands. If I put my hand on a hot iron... my spine is the governing vessel in retracting my arm immediately... not my brain.
Injury is the same concept... if he is injured, he may very well still be armed but he is busy with that injury and vulnerable for the next and the next... so there we have an injured man who happens to have a tool.

I look forward to your reply.

Thank you for lining it up so I can respond accordingly.... the format helps a great deal in articulating. I appreciate the response and the feedback.

standing by.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm going to slightly change the focus of this thread. Until now, we've been talking about attacks in which there is alot of movement. In other words, someone trying to hit you with a club, someone trying to slash or stab at you with a blade. The weapon, whatever it may be, is moving.

What I'd like to focus on for a moment is a static attack. Now, before anyone thinks that I'm talking about moving like some robot, I'm talking about a mugging scenario. You're at the ATM, guy comes up behind you, and presses a blade into your back, demanding cash. You turn around, badguy is there, he grabs you, slams you into a wall, and with his other hand, presses the blade against your throat.

I have my own theories, which I will share later. I'm interested in hearing from those who do not advocate as much control of the weapon as I have been talking about in my posts.

Looking forward to your replies.

Take hold of weapon arm's wrist quickly with the opposite hand so as to move it away from my throat and firmly grip the weapon hand with my other hand, gripping the thumb with my fingers and applying pressure with my thumb to the hand below the pinky knuckle. Turn quickly in the opposite direction of their weapon hand (if right, left, if left, then right), twisting the hand away from his body and downward sharply. This should force him to the ground. Place forward foot firmly in the armpit area, pull up and twist the wrist sharply, breaking it, possibly tearing other things. This will hopefully disarm him. If he still has the fortitude to hang on to the knife, pull up on the arm and stomp kick the trachea.

Remain cognizant of the off hand through this; I do not want to be shot or stabbed by the other hand. If the other hand produces a knife, he is already on the ground, so I can disengage.

At this point, I have my ATM card (none of the machines around here eat them; they all just have you slide them or insert partway and remove). If I did not yet withdraw my cash, I refrain from doing so. If I already have it out and in my pocket, then fine. I simply exit quickly and dial 911 as soon as I have some distance.

Daniel

 

[BLACK LION]

I'm going to slightly change the focus of this thread. Until now, we've been talking about attacks in which there is alot of movement. In other words, someone trying to hit you with a club, someone trying to slash or stab at you with a blade. The weapon, whatever it may be, is moving.

What I'd like to focus on for a moment is a static attack. Now, before anyone thinks that I'm talking about moving like some robot, I'm talking about a mugging scenario. You're at the ATM, guy comes up behind you, and presses a blade into your back, demanding cash. You turn around, badguy is there, he grabs you, slams you into a wall, and with his other hand, presses the blade against your throat. Well its not an assassination by stabbing becuase as soon as he pressed the blade to my back and demanded copitulation he lost his chance. In this scenario the hands immediately go up in neutral and while we are feining the victim and telling them its coming we have already accquired a target through the peripheral vision... rotate with arms still up in neutral whish will naturally knock the blade off track while projecting through and smashing the nearest target... could be a handful of testes , an elbow to the neck a thumb throgh the eye, a brken clavicle, a ruptured ear drum or an elbow to the mandible for an electric knockout.... take the one available and that will open up others...proceed in a serial fashion until satisfied.

Now lets say your back is to the wall and the blade is on your throat... we like to strike the knife arm/hand while settling into the base and shove hard parts of the body in soft areas of thiers... ones you can strike from below....striking and squeezing or kneeing testicles or thumbing the eyes , clutching the esophagus or striking it with the forearm etc... then bash thier face in the wall and break thier arm...then his knee and if need be.. his neck.
I have my own theories, which I will share later. I'm interested in hearing from those who do not advocate as much control of the weapon as I have been talking about in my posts.

Looking forward to your replies.

I tried my best to respond to eveything and forgive me for not proof reading it first. ... I appreciate you formatting it to ease articulation.

Standing by.

 

[MJS]

I feel that while things have been a bit heated, I've been civil. Likewise, I've thanked you in a few of your posts as well. I've said many times, while talking about my take on these subjects, that people are free to do as they choose. I don't claim that my methods are superior. However, I do find it interesting that I've pointed to many sources, all of which are in line with what I've been saying. But again, to each his own. Perhaps its just in the reading, vs. seeing things real time, but I can't help but to interpret many of your posts as hinting that your methods are the only ones that will work. My purpose here is not to solidify some preaching into doctrine. I do have confidence and a particular combative mindset that stands out but it should not be mistaken for some sort of force feeding...especially in an internet forum. I understand your position and I have been there and trained in that fashion but I chose a different path. I know there are many references that line up with what you convey and I understand that is the path you are on. Let it serve you well.
I am only a vessel and in no way the ultimate source in these facets of combat. I am not the source. However I am an instrument and clearly I play a different tune. I offer my perception which is based on factual data... not fantasy warrior mumbo jumbo. You offer your perception which is based on factual data and not some fantasy warrior mumbo jumo. So lets learn... and understand... as students... as warriors... "

Ok.


"In an effort to better understand your views, let me ask you this question. Going on what you've said in many posts, I am reading that you focus more on taking out the person instead of controlling the weapon. Your theory is if you take out the person, the weapon can't hurt you. Am I correct so far? I have to assume I will be whacked,stabbed or shot but what I cannot allow is it to be repeated. I can not remain in an effected state or I will be blugeoned-stabbed or shot to death. Can it hurt me...sure...but if I can still think and move hes done. Most often a person who has been stabbed doesnt realize it becuase they never saw the balde...they report that they were punched.
It only becomes a weapon when a driving body utilizes it with violent intent. If it sits there untouched it is an in-animate object. I focus on taking them out, yes. I focus on certified injuries. I focus on disconnecting the brain from the body and severing the ability to think and move. If I injure them, they are too busy with that injury to put the tool to use. My goal is serial injuries to keep them in an serially effected state until they are non-funtional. no motor function no tool... no brain function no tool. In the end he is just a man who whas beaten to non-functional while holding a tool."

Ok, so going on what you said in your first line...that while you probably will be hit, that you can't allow it to continue, I'd think that by controlling the arm, that would eliminate that moreso than rushing in on them with strikes. Maybe I'm looking at this differently again.


"Going on what you've said, I'm picturing an entry such as a straightblast, to overwhelm the opponent with strikes to various areas, ie: eyes, throat, groin, etc. Am I correct in this? If not, please clarify your exact method of how you enter. Agression utilizing the length of ones inseam is stressed regardless of the angle. The available targets will determine the angle of entry. There is always rotation and we are always looking to get through thier base and replace thier body with ours when striking. A straight blast is a bit different as it is not designed to pull fthier foundation out from under them by stepping through them when striking. I am not seeking to overwhelm them with punches or a flurry of any kind. I am looking for slow, smooth methodical targeting to ensure success in activating the reflex reaction associated with bonafide injury. I trained speed for many years based on what I was taught... I became very successful in being faster than my opponent. Things have changed and I understand speed to equal fear. The fear that the very last thing I did wasnt good enough. I had the perception that violence is chaos and it isnt... its simple..its deliberate..its injury."

For the sake of understanding your method better, lets use an overhead club attack as a reference point. The person swings down on your head. If you're not using the straight blast, at what point are you entering in on them? As they're drawing back to swing? Or do you wait until the swing is completed?


"Assuming that I'm correct with the straightblast theory, I will agree that this is a good method, as I've used it during sparring sessions and it does open up the chance to clinch and work close range strikes, ie: elbows, knees, headbutts, etc. If we do take any strikes on the way into the SB, they're nothing more than empty handed strikes. I strike with my body weight behind my body weapons. I line up my hard parts with thier soft parts and smash through them. Once again. I am not seeking speed combos or a flurry. I am seeking deliberate targets to destroy so set them up for the next and the next... I am looking for destruction... not to compete with speed and technique. "

Ok.


"Now, lets put a blade into the picture. Let us assume that the badguy is slashing at us, alternating between inward and outward slashes. Obviously there is now more to worry about than just an empty handed hit. So, going on this, how do YOU enter in on the person? Knife is moving faster than his body...pick the nearest target and wreck it."

So basically wait until the strike goes by, and if you can reach the eyes, hit them, if the knee is closer, target that?


"Do you consider the knife at all?I consider his body in relation to it, working inside out."

Ok.


" Do you consider that your strikes may not take the person out as planned?I have faith in injuries but not singular ones... I must remain in a serial cause state and them in a serial effect state until non-functionality is achieved. Do you have a backup plan? If so, what is it? Repeat injury till satisfied... this can equate to me stabbing them with my own blade(carry without fail everyday)Do you take into consideration that the BG still has a weapon, still has control over it, and can still use it against you? I think its safe to say that he will probably not stand there and let you attack him, without attempting to use his weapon. Not if I am the one causing injuries... he has no choice over his reactions... its not a concious thought.... the spine has the first say and it will react to stimulus before the brain has a chance to reason.... if this wasnt so... we would all be missing fingers and have burned up hands. If I put my hand on a hot iron... my spine is the governing vessel in retracting my arm immediately... not my brain.
Injury is the same concept... if he is injured, he may very well still be armed but he is busy with that injury and vulnerable for the next and the next... so there we have an injured man who happens to have a tool. "

Ok.



"I look forward to your reply.
Thank you for lining it up so I can respond accordingly.... the format helps a great deal in articulating. I appreciate the response and the feedback.

standing by. "

Sorry for the delayed reply. Net access is limited from work. Thanks for your replies.

 

[MJS]

Take hold of weapon arm's wrist quickly with the opposite hand so as to move it away from my throat and firmly grip the weapon hand with my other hand, gripping the thumb with my fingers and applying pressure with my thumb to the hand below the pinky knuckle. Turn quickly in the opposite direction of their weapon hand (if right, left, if left, then right), twisting the hand away from his body and downward sharply. This should force him to the ground. Place forward foot firmly in the armpit area, pull up and twist the wrist sharply, breaking it, possibly tearing other things. This will hopefully disarm him. If he still has the fortitude to hang on to the knife, pull up on the arm and stomp kick the trachea.

Remain cognizant of the off hand through this; I do not want to be shot or stabbed by the other hand. If the other hand produces a knife, he is already on the ground, so I can disengage.

At this point, I have my ATM card (none of the machines around here eat them; they all just have you slide them or insert partway and remove). If I did not yet withdraw my cash, I refrain from doing so. If I already have it out and in my pocket, then fine. I simply exit quickly and dial 911 as soon as I have some distance.

Daniel

I tried my best to respond to eveything and forgive me for not proof reading it first. ... I appreciate you formatting it to ease articulation.

Standing by.

Ok, make sure you all are sitting before reading this, because what I'm about to say may shock some... I think that these 2 replies are pretty much in line with what I'd do as well. Dans is a bit closer, but BL is not far behind.

Knife from behind....I'm either keeping my hands down or slightly raising them. Doesn't matter which direction I choose to go in, but I use either the left or right arm to strike their knife hand, and then turn. From there, depending on which direction I choose, I can either lock their arm or do what would be called a backward throw, in Arnis. Of course, strikes can be added.

Knife to the throat...I want control here. The rest is pretty much spot on with what Dan said. Once I grab the weapon hand, I can strike to their face, or go into the wrist lock/takedown and finish as needed.

 

[K-man]

I have read through all the animated discussion and in reality I think that BL and MJS are both right. The problem is in the definition of control.
If control means to grab the hand holding the weapon and apply some form of restraint, or even go further and suggest an aikido style manipulation and disarm, then I do not believe that that is a physical practicality against a frenzied attack, particularly when the adrenalin dump sends all the fine motor skills out the window.
If not to control means totally ignore the weapon, just get in there and beat the crap out of the attacker regardless of what he is trying to do to you, then that also, IMHO, is not a classy option either.
So let's look for a compromise. I am willing to concede that control could mean to deflect the attack or evade the attack to enable you to attack the attacker's body, as long as it prevents the attacker from getting another shot. What this means is that the weapon is out of the way long enough for you to strike. To do this you don't have to focus on the weapon, peripheral vision will enable you to see that, and if you get lucky you might even have hold of the arm or wrist. Then you smash him with everything you have. Only then would I be looking for a disarm.
If you watch some of the Krav Maga defence against bottles, sticks or knives they never go for the weapon. If you get into a wrestle for control it is likely that the strongest will win.

 

[MJS]

I have read through all the animated discussion and in reality I think that BL and MJS are both right. The problem is in the definition of control.
If control means to grab the hand holding the weapon and apply some form of restraint, or even go further and suggest an aikido style manipulation and disarm, then I do not believe that that is a physical practicality against a frenzied attack, particularly when the adrenalin dump sends all the fine motor skills out the window.
If not to control means totally ignore the weapon, just get in there and beat the crap out of the attacker regardless of what he is trying to do to you, then that also, IMHO, is not a classy option either.
So let's look for a compromise. I am willing to concede that control could mean to deflect the attack or evade the attack to enable you to attack the attacker's body, as long as it prevents the attacker from getting another shot. What this means is that the weapon is out of the way long enough for you to strike. To do this you don't have to focus on the weapon, peripheral vision will enable you to see that, and if you get lucky you might even have hold of the arm or wrist. Then you smash him with everything you have. Only then would I be looking for a disarm.
If you watch some of the Krav Maga defence against bottles, sticks or knives they never go for the weapon. If you get into a wrestle for control it is likely that the strongest will win.

Lets use an over head attack as an example. Now, we could do one of two things. 1) we could wait until the attack has passed us, or 2) we could move into them during the initial phase of the attack. So badguy starts to draw back. That is when I move in. Not only am I jamming him up, but I'm slamming into him. Think about the SPEAR from Tony Blauer. We also saw something similar in a few of those clips I linked on the Krav Maga. I gain control and follow up with knees, elbows, hits to the face, whatever. I'm not trying for a fancy method of control. Simply wrapping their arm gives me enough control, as well as control of them.

Any locks that I may use, if they present themselves, are prefaced by a shot which serves as a distraction. Its no different than someone grabbing your wrist. To think that you'd be able to just go into some lock is foolish, IMO. Instead, preface that lock with a hit to the face, a kick to the shin. Then you go into the lock. I'm taking their mind off of the grab and making them think, "Oh crap, his hand is coming at my face."

Back to the control. I can think of a few Kenpo club techs. off the top of my head, in which a simple pin is used. Kenpo is full of checks and pins, all done with the body, the legs, and the hands/arms. So yes, its possible to control simply by using a check.

I like to work these various techniques as alive as possible. We'll break out a padded stick and go at it. The person holding the stick is really trying to hit us, and yes, I've been hit, and yes it hurts like hell, despite the padding. LOL! I remember one morning while I was getting dressed, my wife asked what all the red marks were on my chest. Needless to say, when she remembered the workout from the day before her reply was, "Nevermind, I know where you got them." LOL! And yes, many times, when I've gone for control, it either hasn't happened, or it took a second or two. Training like this, IMHO, is what keeps those who are serious about SD, on their toes.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm going to slightly change the focus of this thread. Until now, we've been talking about attacks in which there is alot of movement. In other words, someone trying to hit you with a club, someone trying to slash or stab at you with a blade. The weapon, whatever it may be, is moving.

What I'd like to focus on for a moment is a static attack. Now, before anyone thinks that I'm talking about moving like some robot, I'm talking about a mugging scenario. You're at the ATM, guy comes up behind you, and presses a blade into your back, demanding cash. You turn around, badguy is there, he grabs you, slams you into a wall, and with his other hand, presses the blade against your throat.

I have my own theories, which I will share later. I'm interested in hearing from those who do not advocate as much control of the weapon as I have been talking about in my posts.

Looking forward to your replies.

I would also like to mention that I deal with this very scenario preemptively. I never use an ATM that is not inside of a public building (like a service station or convenience store). I also will only use them during the day unless unavoidable. I use my debit card in lieu of cash most of the time in order to reduce the amount of cash that I carry and to avoid having to go to an ATM. On the very rare occasion that I do need to use an ATM, regardless of its location or time of day, I do take stock of who is around and whether or not I am being watched by anyone else.

Thus the likelihood of the scenario that you describe has been reduced to virtually nill before it ever takes place. Self defense encompasses a great deal of skill sets outside of just defending against physical attacks, and most of those skills are not physical. Lifestyle choices, habits, awareness, interpersonal skills and a whole host of mental skills comprise the majority of one's self defense.

Sad thing is, very few people are really aware of that. For most, self defense begins with the encounter. Many exercise some habits that will keep them out of trouble, but are woefully unaware and even less able to defend themselves after an encounter begins.

Daniel

 

[BLACK LION]

Very good point Daniel.
Even though we train to combat these sorts of threat.We cannot forsake ourselves the habit of being aware of all our surroundings and who or what is in them. If we are suprised or cuaght off gaurd then we were clearly asleep on watch which is a big no no. The best way to combat a threat is not to be there at all. And thats really jsut about habituating awareness and assertiveness in normal behavior. We must always position ourselves to have the advantage, even if our back is turned or our attention occupied. We should have the advantage regardless if we are ordering food in a drive thru or changing a diaper in the backseat or carrying an arm full of groceries... we are on call 24/7 365 and there is not a moment that passes that we should not be on watch.
Its not paranoia... its preparation.

Thank you for that post.

 

[sgtmac_46]

It's why they call destroying the weapon hand 'Defanging the snake'........because it's not the poisonous snake's BODY that can do you damage.......it is the FANG! The same with the knife (or gun).......damaging the body is all well and good, but a single stab or shot can be lethal, just like a single bite from the snake.

 

[BLACK LION]

"Sorry for the delayed reply. Net access is limited from work. Thanks for your replies."

This is my problem. I do not have a computer at home nor do I have a cell phone. Work comp is the only option when it is one.

We have more in common than we know MJS

 

[K-man]

Lets use an over head attack as an example. Now, we could do one of two things. 1) we could wait until the attack has passed us, or 2) we could move into them during the initial phase of the attack. So badguy starts to draw back. That is when I move in. Not only am I jamming him up, but I'm slamming into him. Think about the SPEAR from Tony Blauer. We also saw something similar in a few of those clips I linked on the Krav Maga. I gain control and follow up with knees, elbows, hits to the face, whatever. I'm not trying for a fancy method of control. Simply wrapping their arm gives me enough control, as well as control of them.

Any locks that I may use, if they present themselves, are prefaced by a shot which serves as a distraction. Its no different than someone grabbing your wrist. To think that you'd be able to just go into some lock is foolish, IMO. Instead, preface that lock with a hit to the face, a kick to the shin. Then you go into the lock. I'm taking their mind off of the grab and making them think, "Oh crap, his hand is coming at my face."

Back to the control. I can think of a few Kenpo club techs. off the top of my head, in which a simple pin is used. Kenpo is full of checks and pins, all done with the body, the legs, and the hands/arms. So yes, its possible to control simply by using a check.

Interesting scenario. My karate training sees me coming in, as long as there is a high enough backlift and I can get in early, jam, strike and take down. My Aikido training sees the weapon deflected down, strike and control, then take down. Both difficult at full pace, but then, that's why we train constantly. :asian:

 

[MJS]

I would also like to mention that I deal with this very scenario preemptively. I never use an ATM that is not inside of a public building (like a service station or convenience store). I also will only use them during the day unless unavoidable. I use my debit card in lieu of cash most of the time in order to reduce the amount of cash that I carry and to avoid having to go to an ATM. On the very rare occasion that I do need to use an ATM, regardless of its location or time of day, I do take stock of who is around and whether or not I am being watched by anyone else.

Thus the likelihood of the scenario that you describe has been reduced to virtually nill before it ever takes place. Self defense encompasses a great deal of skill sets outside of just defending against physical attacks, and most of those skills are not physical. Lifestyle choices, habits, awareness, interpersonal skills and a whole host of mental skills comprise the majority of one's self defense.

Sad thing is, very few people are really aware of that. For most, self defense begins with the encounter. Many exercise some habits that will keep them out of trouble, but are woefully unaware and even less able to defend themselves after an encounter begins.

Daniel

I agree...being aware is more than half the battle. Likewise, I prefer to use the indoor one at my bank as well. There is a drive up one, however it is in the rear of the building, so while you still have the protection of your vehicle, its still out of sight. I also prefer to use them either during the day but like you said, if I need to use one at night, I do check the area.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I agree...being aware is more than half the battle. Likewise, I prefer to use the indoor one at my bank as well. There is a drive up one, however it is in the rear of the building, so while you still have the protection of your vehicle, its still out of sight. I also prefer to use them either during the day but like you said, if I need to use one at night, I do check the area.

I definitely prefer to be mobile and in a car at the ATM. First sign of danger good bye. (vroom, vroom)

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I definitely prefer to be mobile and in a car at the ATM. First sign of danger good bye. (vroom, vroom)

Just a point of clarification, I was thinking specifically of walk up ATM machines, not the drive throughs, though I also tend to avoid the drive up ones at night as well.

Daniel