What MUST be taught in a Self-Defense Course?

[MI_martialist]

You are using examples of motivated clients. I could relate literally dozens of examples of students who, when starting, couldn't bring themselves to deliver a strike with or without a weapon with any force that would be more than distracting.

You're assuming a room full of folks attending a 2-hour self-defense workshop will be like your client who feels threatened enough to hire personal security. Those are two entirely different audiences.

I used one example...of someone who attended our training, who was threatened, and who acted...I don't know where the personal security comes in...a corporate client is a company who offered the training to their employees...not an individual who hired us...

Maybe the differences in our outcomes are a function of the difference in efficaciousness of the training.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I used one example...of someone who attended our training, who was threatened, and who acted...I don't know where the personal security comes in...a corporate client is a company who offered the training to their employees...not an individual who hired us...

Maybe the differences in our outcomes are a function of the difference in efficaciousness of the training.

A single example, as others have pointed out in recent discussions, is not much evidence. My wife's Design of Experiments professor used to say, "Don't get too excited about a single data point. It has to go somewhere." Are you seeing this as a common occurrence?

 

[MI_martialist]

A single example, as others have pointed out in recent discussions, is not much evidence. My wife's Design of Experiments professor used to say, "Don't get too excited about a single data point. It has to go somewhere." Are you seeing this as a common occurrence?

No, it is actually the only time our training has ever been effective, so we are excited about it...

Oh wait...all I did was cite one recent example. The training we conduct is the exact same approach that combat trainers have in the military...what is first and foremost in our mind is the consequences of our training, because there are consequences. If we fail, the potential is loss of life. It really is as simple as that...life and death. That is why skills cannot be taught in this type of environment. To employ any skills, it take time and training...what these folks don't have.

In order for someone to be successful first, they must have the will to act...then they have to act, because they will act if they have the will to act...we weaponize their mind while having them use weapons...effectively, in a chaotic environment...

Here's the thing...if one is attacked, it is not going to be in a sterile environment. If one trains in a sterile environment, one will be shocked if the actual environment is not sterile...so the trainee needs to be accustomed to an unsterile environment...chaotic, hectic, 360 degrees, etc.

If one is attacked, let's assume there will always be multiple attackers...and if there are not, it is easier to deal with. If we bring the trainees awareness to 360 degrees, in a cluttered chaotic environment, with people all around, moving, bumping into each other...does that resemble combat or battle a little more than nice neat lines with someone doing a static attack?

Then, we assume everyone is armed...including the one being attacked...so we arm them...in the chaotic, hectic environment, with people all around, anatomically correct torso targets for hitting, while bumping into people, getting bumped into...striking all levels...sitting, standing, kneeling...fighting up and fighting down...

...

 

[Ironbear24]

And they weren't moving, threatening you, or doing anything else to make hitting them (or even handling the gun) difficult.

If they were that would be pretty alarming.

 

[Juany118]

That's if the attacker is in a full sprint and the gun is safetied and holstered.

While the last part is correct, weapon holstered but it is not with the weapon on safe or the subject already sprinting. Here is a video that goes a bit into it if both subjects are very skilled.

Instructor Zero having his back to Doug is also a fairly good replacement for genuine surprise. So not only do you need to do more than draw and shoot you have to move or shoot in an unusual position. Conversely if the knife wielder has half a brain your reactionary gap can be, in essence, infinite rather than 21 feet because you won't suspect the hostility until the knife wielder is already in striking range.

Here is a video with Guro Dan explaining the gap as it relates to Police Officers with typical training.

Now most civilian self defense scenarios will have the defender with the firearm holstered and in a concealment condition. Add to that they will likely not have the extensive training of A. Deploying a weapon under stress and B. Moving and shooting there is a problem.

On the street, I am far more worried about a knife than a gun tbh because as Doug said in the previous video someone who really wants to do harm to me, and is not having a mental health crisis, will likely not even display the knife and I will instead feel it first.

 

[Juany118]

Your assumption is that I do not.

I teach people to use existing movements (what you term "martializing" - I like that term!). They do not adapt them quickly unless they have prior training. If you add something like a weapon they don't know how to use, their adaptation is even slower.

Pretty much this, for a few reasons. First you have to really work on generating "intent" to make a "normal" motion become a defensive/offensive motion. Second adding a weapon changes body mechanics. Let's say you want to convert showing open a door into a thrust with a kubaton say. The wrist alignment is different and you need to train them in proper alignment otherwise they can end up having a strike that would be weaker than a "simple" punch. This also doesn't even include learning to deploy it rapidly under stress. What good is knowing how to use the weapon if when surprised you are fumbling in your pocket and now don't have that hand (hands) up to defend.

Additionally one has to very careful with what weapons, if any are used/taught because many can be illegal in various states, even a kubaton, as many States have laws regarding "Prohibited offensive weapons" which basically just means "if it's only/primary purpose is to cause injury/maim another person it's illegal."

 

[Buka]

I covered "Stand your ground" laws briefly in a book I wrote, which is on Amazon, which no one buys. LOL

If you mentioned this before, I missed it. Didn't miss it this time, just bought it with the one click thingy. Thanks, bro.

 

[wingchun100]

If you mentioned this before, I missed it. Didn't miss it this time, just bought it with the one click thingy. Thanks, bro.

You bought my book? Holy cow! First sale in years!

 

[MI_martialist]

Pretty much this, for a few reasons. First you have to really work on generating "intent" to make a "normal" motion become a defensive/offensive motion. Second adding a weapon changes body mechanics. Let's say you want to convert showing open a door into a thrust with a kubaton say. The wrist alignment is different and you need to train them in proper alignment otherwise they can end up having a strike that would be weaker than a "simple" punch. This also doesn't even include learning to deploy it rapidly under stress. What good is knowing how to use the weapon if when surprised you are fumbling in your pocket and now don't have that hand (hands) up to defend.

Additionally one has to very careful with what weapons, if any are used/taught because many can be illegal in various states, even a kubaton, as many States have laws regarding "Prohibited offensive weapons" which basically just means "if it's only/primary purpose is to cause injury/maim another person it's illegal."

A few items:

The difference seems to be that you are worried about their form, while I am worried about how many times they can hit and be able to escape with their life. Sure, form is important, but we can all recognize that we are not going to instruct proper form to new people in 90 minutes or 2 hours...not going to happen. They need to act...and what happens if when they are repeatedly hitting the attacker escaping with their life they sprain their wrist, or hurt their hand? That's life!! That's combat!! That's battle! That's not self defense.

Concerning what weapons to cover..l.we do not change ever what weapons we cover...we do not provide the legal advice of what to carry and use and what not to...this is about survival and each individual can make that decision...but then again, I do not know any state where a pen, flashlight, stick are illegal..or lanyard for more advanced training, or a stapler, or a pencil, or, or, or, or...you see, it is not about teaching different weapons...it is about having the mindset that everything is a weapon...

 

[Juany118]

A few items:

The difference seems to be that you are worried about their form, while I am worried about how many times they can hit and be able to escape with their life. Sure, form is important, but we can all recognize that we are not going to instruct proper form to new people in 90 minutes or 2 hours...not going to happen. They need to act...and what happens if when they are repeatedly hitting the attacker escaping with their life they sprain their wrist, or hurt their hand? That's life!! That's combat!! That's battle! That's not self defense.

Concerning what weapons to cover..l.we do not change ever what weapons we cover...we do not provide the legal advice of what to carry and use and what not to...this is about survival and each individual can make that decision...but then again, I do not know any state where a pen, flashlight, stick are illegal..or lanyard for more advanced training, or a stapler, or a pencil, or, or, or, or...you see, it is not about teaching different weapons...it is about having the mindset that everything is a weapon...

I'm not talking about picture perfect form. I am notorious in my school for being a good fighter but not a "pretty one." I am talking about form in terms of not hurting oneself. If you hurt yourself while defending you often might as well not defended at all.

Second legality is very important, especially with weapons. Forget about whether an expandable baton or a black jack etc may be illegal but there is the issue of reasonableness. Example if someone goes and shoves you and you use a weapon of any sort you are going to find yourself in legal trouble. So, imo, to simply teach weapon use for self defense without bring this into the mix and saying instead "it's on them" is irresponsible.

That aside I think you greatly over estimate the actual efficacy of any technique, especially weapon related, that is taught only in a 1-2 hour seminar. I have taken such courses as a Law Enforcement Officer and they are, essentially, useless and that was my opinion of the course BEFORE I renewed my interest in studying martial arts.

 

[MI_martialist]

I'm not talking about picture perfect form. I am notorious in my school for being a good fighter but not a "pretty one." I am talking about form in terms of not hurting oneself. If you hurt yourself while defending you often might as well not defended at all.

Second legality is very important, especially with weapons. Forget about whether an expandable baton or a black jack etc may be illegal but there is the issue of reasonableness. Example if someone goes and shoves you and you use a weapon of any sort you are going to find yourself in legal trouble. So, imo, to simply teach weapon use for self defense without bring this into the mix and saying instead "it's on them" is irresponsible.

That aside I think you greatly over estimate the actual efficacy of any technique, especially weapon related, that is taught only in a 1-2 hour seminar. I have taken such courses as a Law Enforcement Officer and they are, essentially, useless and that was my opinion of the course BEFORE I renewed my interest in studying martial arts.

If you hurt yourself while defending yourself, then it really doesn't matter because defense is too late. If you hurt yourself while protecting what is personal to you, is that not better than, let's say...being raped, or killed? Would I accept a broken hand over no longer breathing? Yeah...any day of the week.

Let us not forget that we only have these people for a VERY short period of time, and they came to learn how to protect themselves...let them talk to their favorite lawyer or LEO over a cup of coffee to be told what not to do. I am going to empower them to do what they need to do to protect themselves.

Once again, there is an assumption that we say it is OK for someone to shoot a 12 year old who bumps into them...organic to the training is not only "action" but "appropriate action" and that can only be done by putting people in as real of a scenario as they can handle...and maybe a bit more...

Legality is not my issue...I am going to instruct people how to increase their chances of surviving an encounter...

That aside, I think you make assumption on the efficacy of what we do without ever having experienced it. I will state again...need to get out of the mindset of teaching technique, but rather programming people for action.

 

[Juany118]

If you hurt yourself while defending yourself, then it really doesn't matter because defense is too late. If you hurt yourself while protecting what is personal to you, is that not better than, let's say...being raped, or killed? Would I accept a broken hand over no longer breathing? Yeah...any day of the week.

Let us not forget that we only have these people for a VERY short period of time, and they came to learn how to protect themselves...let them talk to their favorite lawyer or LEO over a cup of coffee to be told what not to do. I am going to empower them to do what they need to do to protect themselves.

Once again, there is an assumption that we say it is OK for someone to shoot a 12 year old who bumps into them...organic to the training is not only "action" but "appropriate action" and that can only be done by putting people in as real of a scenario as they can handle...and maybe a bit more...

Legality is not my issue...I am going to instruct people how to increase their chances of surviving an encounter...

That aside, I think you make assumption on the efficacy of what we do without ever having experienced it. I will state again...need to get out of the mindset of teaching technique, but rather programming people for action.

Just on the last bit...I am not making any assumptions. I have taken courses that claim the same you do, right down to using the same language, "programming for action" and that try to use natural and/or instinctive movements. The work well during that seminar but they do not work in actual defense situations. They lack realistic (though simulated) pressure (which is very important for just deploying a weapon let alone using it) and they don't generate the necessary muscle memory that one needs so they can build upon it by practicing on their own.

Also the language you are using here "..I am going to instruct people how to increase their chances of surviving an encounter" works against the idea that legality isn't your issue. All you have to do is look at a number of threads here where people have little clue as to what force can be used when. Language like this only serves to further an impression that defense is simply defense and people likely won't even bother thinking about asking. It doesn't take a whole lot of time to simply say "hey, you can only use weapons when you can properly articulate that you were in fear of serious bodily injury/death, were being robbed or raped etc. Heck you just give a hand out that explains it.

 

[Buka]

It's a different world than it used to be. Sooner or later, legality will be part of what any instructor covers.

 

[Ironbear24]

On the street, I am far more worried about a knife than a gun tbh

I don't agree with this statement because for one the knife has to be close to me, that is where I am best at, there I can at least fight back and possibly disarm the attacker, With a gun I would have little to no chance because the person can kill me from a distance where I cannot do anything to them.

I feel like a lot of people are really undermining just how dangerous a gun is.

 

[Juany118]

It's a different world than it used to be. Sooner or later, legality will be part of what any instructor covers.

Waiting for the day the instructor gets sued when a student uses an inappropriate level of force...either by the student or "victim" for "he didn't tell me the ramifications". I mean they have to write "Caution Hot" on coffee cups because McDonalds got sued.

 

[Juany118]

I don't agree with this statement because for one the knife has to be close to me, that is where I am best at, there I can at least fight back and possibly disarm the attacker, With a gun I would have little to no chance because the person can kill me from a distance where I cannot do anything to them.

I feel like a lot of people are really undermining just how dangerous a gun is.

Ummmm, I know precisely how dangerous a gun is since I have to carry one everyday at work. Here is the difference IMO though...

Unless I am ambushed I will usually be in a position to seek cover and concealment to then return fire. Also depending on the skill of the shooter (luckily most crooks suck) can be a mixed bag. Yes it means they can attack without closing but the distance also has an impact on the chances to actually him me. If you look at recent police shootings where officers were killed they were either perpetrated by trained military personnel (rare) or at very close ranges.

As for the knife it's about someone who just does something that is common sense, don't let the person know you have the knife until you have already cut/stabbed them.

Simply look at the Guro Dan video (the second one). You don't get that kind of surprise with a gun, unless again it's a genuine ambush. Additionally my body armor does jack for a knife except one place, a 4" by 6" panel in the center of my vest where I took an old steel trauma plate and put it under the issued soft trauma plate. Also knives are essentially everywhere. Most officers I know either share my assessment or say both are equally concerning.

 

[drop bear]

If you hurt yourself while defending yourself, then it really doesn't matter because defense is too late. If you hurt yourself while protecting what is personal to you, is that not better than, let's say...being raped, or killed? Would I accept a broken hand over no longer breathing? Yeah...any day of the week.

Let us not forget that we only have these people for a VERY short period of time, and they came to learn how to protect themselves...let them talk to their favorite lawyer or LEO over a cup of coffee to be told what not to do. I am going to empower them to do what they need to do to protect themselves.

Once again, there is an assumption that we say it is OK for someone to shoot a 12 year old who bumps into them...organic to the training is not only "action" but "appropriate action" and that can only be done by putting people in as real of a scenario as they can handle...and maybe a bit more...

Legality is not my issue...I am going to instruct people how to increase their chances of surviving an encounter...

That aside, I think you make assumption on the efficacy of what we do without ever having experienced it. I will state again...need to get out of the mindset of teaching technique, but rather programming people for action.

See that video i put up about how to defend against a crocodile?

None of it was about how to fight one after it has grabbed you.

If you only have so much time you have to play the techniques with the highest percentage of success.

 

[drop bear]

It's a different world than it used to be. Sooner or later, legality will be part of what any instructor covers.

At which point i will be glad i do a sport and not have to subject myself to whatever is the accepted version of self defence.

"what do you mean you hit him? Haven't you been trained in wrist locks? "

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No, it is actually the only time our training has ever been effective, so we are excited about it...

Oh wait...all I did was cite one recent example. The training we conduct is the exact same approach that combat trainers have in the military...what is first and foremost in our mind is the consequences of our training, because there are consequences. If we fail, the potential is loss of life. It really is as simple as that...life and death. That is why skills cannot be taught in this type of environment. To employ any skills, it take time and training...what these folks don't have.

In order for someone to be successful first, they must have the will to act...then they have to act, because they will act if they have the will to act...we weaponize their mind while having them use weapons...effectively, in a chaotic environment...

Here's the thing...if one is attacked, it is not going to be in a sterile environment. If one trains in a sterile environment, one will be shocked if the actual environment is not sterile...so the trainee needs to be accustomed to an unsterile environment...chaotic, hectic, 360 degrees, etc.

If one is attacked, let's assume there will always be multiple attackers...and if there are not, it is easier to deal with. If we bring the trainees awareness to 360 degrees, in a cluttered chaotic environment, with people all around, moving, bumping into each other...does that resemble combat or battle a little more than nice neat lines with someone doing a static attack?

Then, we assume everyone is armed...including the one being attacked...so we arm them...in the chaotic, hectic environment, with people all around, anatomically correct torso targets for hitting, while bumping into people, getting bumped into...striking all levels...sitting, standing, kneeling...fighting up and fighting down...

...

What did any of that rant have to do with my comment? I said nothing about sterile vs. chaotic (neither of which, by the way, is a good answer in and of itself). I said nothing about where your training came from. Your reply seems irrespective of my comment.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You bought my book? Holy cow! First sale in years!

You'll have another as soon as I remember when I am on a browser that remembers my Amazon password. Crap, now I'm over here grumbling about new-fangled passwords like an old man.