self defense... what do you think?

[Branded]

The time I was attacked I was into karate stuff, and it was useless. A guy in front of me was the distraction, the guy behind me hit me with a brick when I turned around. All they wanted was a stupid t-shirt from a rock concert. I had to get stitches on my face. Luckily, they had a good platic surgeon on call that night at the houston hospital. So my advice is, don't hang around bars and places where people are drinking. Be aware of your surroundings. Attackers are not interested in playing macho combat games, and will make sure they have a big advantage.

That being said, I watch the ultimate fighting championship to see what really works.

 

[Maetryx]

Ruger SK101 .357 magnum. It's simplicity and quality make it a great choice. My wife has the stainless steel snub nose. It's really fun to shoot. She loads it with .38 for carry, but I load it with .357 at the shooting range to get that satisfying explosion and kick.

 

[notfred]

If I was seriously worried about needing to defend myself, I'd get a .45

 

[kgraeme]

Based on the several comments here I looked at Krav Maga. Looks a lot like what I was teaching for basic self defense. I agree with the principles, except that I see things in their videos that are quick ways to get a person hurt or killed. Their choke breaks are less effective than what I taught and if attempted and failed, the person is in for a beating. And weapon disarms like they show are a quick way to get somebody shot if the person isn't disciplined in relaxed speed with strength, and even then it can be a crap shoot. I speak from experience here.

Edit: I'm not crapping on Krav Maga. I'm only making the point that it depends more on the individual than the style. And even experts do stupid things sometimes. I know I did. Better to hand over the money than to escalate the situation.

 

[tcsenter]

Jiu Jitsu. It's not so good against multiple opponents, but if one opponent gets you to the ground you will feel comfortable there (That's where nearly ALL fights end up, whether you like it or not).

This is just the sort of confusion that Mr. Uman is referring to. What you're describing are two hot-headed people 'squaring-off' for a 'fight', two willing combatants. That is not "self defense", its fighting, and that is where most martial arts dojos, schools, or academies make their mistake. They claim to teach "self defense", but what they're really teaching is competitive or tournament style martial arts.

Those who don't understand there are critical differences between the two have either been students of tournament style martial arts or have never actually been in a true self-defense situation, or both.

Self defense is about NOT 'mixing it up' with an opponent or getting involved in a protracted confrontation. The term "opponent" isn't even appropriate, because it implies a competitive nature. A more appropriate term would be 'aggressor' or 'attacker'.

Self defense is not two guys at the bar, one bumps into the other, some words are exchanged, and the two go outside to settle their differences. That's competitive martial arts. The only things at stake are one's pride, bragging rights, perhaps a split lip, some swollen knuckles and loose teeth.

We're talking about getting up for a late night snack and being surprised in your living room by a two time felon who was just released on parole. What is at stake is one's life or serious injury. That's "self defense".

The essence of self defense is to inflict the maximum amount of damage in the shortest amount of time, with the goal of disorienting or, ideally, incapacitating an attacker long enough to remove one's self from danger and get to safety, by running if need be. If the defender has an opportunity to definitively end the confrontation, he takes it, but that opportunity cannot be counted on and often doesn't present itself.

The defender is typically at a serious disadvantage from the start because the defender will likely be caught by surprise and has little or no time to prepare himself psychologically. Brutal tactics like eye gouges are not taught in tournament arts, but in a self defense encounter, you don't care if you rip some guy's cornea off and blind him. Similarly, you don't care if you break bones and shred joint capsules, leaving someone with an injury that could be disabling. In fact, inflicting that sort of injury is highly preferred.

Surviving a self defense enounter may require a psychological ploy or de-escalation techniques, which almost no martial arts schools deal with. Weapons are A-OK, anything literally goes, there are no rules, restrictions, and fairness doesn't exist. You don't "win" a self defense encounter, you "survive" it, and this is where many schools or instructors completely miss the mark.

The two types of combat - competitive and self defense - aren't mutually exclusive, but they are sufficiently different and need to be treated seperately.

 

[BlueApple]

Originally posted by: Maetryx
Ruger SK101 .357 magnum. It's simplicity and quality make it a great choice. My wife has the stainless steel snub nose. It's really fun to shoot. She loads it with .38 for carry, but I load it with .357 at the shooting range to get that satisfying explosion and kick.

That looks like it would be perfect for self-defense. link/pic

 

[kazeakuma]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Jiu Jitsu. It's not so good against multiple opponents, but if one opponent gets you to the ground you will feel comfortable there (That's where nearly ALL fights end up, whether you like it or not).

This is just the sort of confusion that Mr. Uman is referring to. What you're describing are two hot-headed people 'squaring-off' for a 'fight', two willing combatants. That is not "self defense", its fighting, and that is where most martial arts dojos, schools, or academies make their mistake. They claim to teach "self defense", but what they're really teaching is competitive or tournament style martial arts.

Those who don't understand there are critical differences between the two have either been students of tournament style martial arts or have never actually been in a true self-defense situation, or both.

Self defense is about NOT 'mixing it up' with an opponent or getting involved in a protracted confrontation. The term "opponent" isn't even appropriate, because it implies a competitive nature. A more appropriate term would be 'aggressor' or 'attacker'.

Self defense is not two guys at the bar, one bumps into the other, some words are exchanged, and the two go outside to settle their differences. That's competitive martial arts. The only things at stake are one's pride, bragging rights, perhaps a split lip, some swollen knuckles and loose teeth.

We're talking about getting up for a late night snack and being surprised in your living room by a two time felon who was just released on parole. What is at stake is one's life or serious injury. That's "self defense".

The essence of self defense is to inflict the maximum amount of damage in the shortest amount of time, with the goal of disorienting or, ideally, incapacitating an attacker long enough to remove one's self from danger and get to safety, by running if need be. If the defender has an opportunity to definitively end the confrontation, he takes it, but that opportunity cannot be counted on and often doesn't present itself.

The defender is typically at a serious disadvantage from the start because the defender will likely be caught by surprise and has little or no time to prepare himself psychologically. Brutal tactics like eye gouges are not taught in tournament arts, but in a self defense encounter, you don't care if you rip some guy's cornea off and blind him. Similarly, you don't care if you break bones and shred joint capsules, leaving someone with an injury that could be disabling. In fact, inflicting that sort of injury is highly preferred.

Surviving a self defense enounter may require a psychological ploy or de-escalation techniques, which almost no martial arts schools deal with. Weapons are A-OK, anything literally goes, there are no rules, restrictions, and fairness doesn't exist. You don't "win" a self defense encounter, you "survive" it, and this is where many schools or instructors completely miss the mark.

The two types of combat - competitive and self defense - aren't mutually exclusive, but they are sufficiently different and need to be treated seperately.

Hmmm, in my opinion, schools that teach tournament fighting aren't martial arts schools. More like sports centers.

You raise some good points, but if you've ever been to a real martial arts school, you will realise that you ARE taught most of this. Underhand tactics usually aren't taught by most styles as there is a strong emphasis on honour, unless you take Ju-Jitsu. I learnt a ton of underhand tactics with Ju-jitsu as what it literally teaches is street fighting. Which is what Ju-Jitsu is supposed to be, albeit highly formalised. A decent school will also teach multiple opponent attacks. And if you've watched any forms/patterns/kata you'll notice that 90% deal with multiple opponents. The advanced stuff simultaneously.

I don't quite agree with your idea of maiming people. But different people different strokes.

About the girls thing. I agree with this, I've taught a lot of girls and seen alot come through the school. A lot of them don't put the effort required into the art. An easy example is bag work, most of them fairy punch a bag instead of putting a bit of strength behind it. I think alot of it has to do with 'image'. That said I know some women I would not mess with. I've met Australia's highest ranked female in Aikido and she will take you down. Doesn't look it either, but then Aikido is a very good style for self defense as it is what could be called 'situational defense' as well as classical.

 

[Carl Uman]

Originally posted by: kazeakuma

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Jiu Jitsu. It's not so good against multiple opponents, but if one opponent gets you to the ground you will feel comfortable there (That's where nearly ALL fights end up, whether you like it or not).

This is just the sort of confusion that Mr. Uman is referring to. What you're describing are two hot-headed people 'squaring-off' for a 'fight', two willing combatants. That is not "self defense", its fighting, and that is where most martial arts dojos, schools, or academies make their mistake. They claim to teach "self defense", but what they're really teaching is competitive or tournament style martial arts.

Those who don't understand there are critical differences between the two have either been students of tournament style martial arts or have never actually been in a true self-defense situation, or both.

Self defense is about NOT 'mixing it up' with an opponent or getting involved in a protracted confrontation. The term "opponent" isn't even appropriate, because it implies a competitive nature. A more appropriate term would be 'aggressor' or 'attacker'.

Self defense is not two guys at the bar, one bumps into the other, some words are exchanged, and the two go outside to settle their differences. That's competitive martial arts. The only things at stake are one's pride, bragging rights, perhaps a split lip, some swollen knuckles and loose teeth.

We're talking about getting up for a late night snack and being surprised in your living room by a two time felon who was just released on parole. What is at stake is one's life or serious injury. That's "self defense".

The essence of self defense is to inflict the maximum amount of damage in the shortest amount of time, with the goal of disorienting or, ideally, incapacitating an attacker long enough to remove one's self from danger and get to safety, by running if need be. If the defender has an opportunity to definitively end the confrontation, he takes it, but that opportunity cannot be counted on and often doesn't present itself.

The defender is typically at a serious disadvantage from the start because the defender will likely be caught by surprise and has little or no time to prepare himself psychologically. Brutal tactics like eye gouges are not taught in tournament arts, but in a self defense encounter, you don't care if you rip some guy's cornea off and blind him. Similarly, you don't care if you break bones and shred joint capsules, leaving someone with an injury that could be disabling. In fact, inflicting that sort of injury is highly preferred.

Surviving a self defense enounter may require a psychological ploy or de-escalation techniques, which almost no martial arts schools deal with. Weapons are A-OK, anything literally goes, there are no rules, restrictions, and fairness doesn't exist. You don't "win" a self defense encounter, you "survive" it, and this is where many schools or instructors completely miss the mark.

The two types of combat - competitive and self defense - aren't mutually exclusive, but they are sufficiently different and need to be treated seperately.

Hmmm, in my opinion, schools that teach tournament fighting aren't martial arts schools. More like sports centers.

You raise some good points, but if you've ever been to a real martial arts school, you will realise that you ARE taught most of this. Underhand tactics usually aren't taught by most styles as there is a strong emphasis on honour, unless you take Ju-Jitsu. I learnt a ton of underhand tactics with Ju-jitsu as what it literally teaches is street fighting. Which is what Ju-Jitsu is supposed to be, albeit highly formalised. A decent school will also teach multiple opponent attacks. And if you've watched any forms/patterns/kata you'll notice that 90% deal with multiple opponents. The advanced stuff simultaneously.

I don't quite agree with your idea of maiming people. But different people different strokes.

About the girls thing. I agree with this, I've taught a lot of girls and seen alot come through the school. A lot of them don't put the effort required into the art. An easy example is bag work, most of them fairy punch a bag instead of putting a bit of strength behind it. I think alot of it has to do with 'image'. That said I know some women I would not mess with. I've met Australia's highest ranked female in Aikido and she will take you down. Doesn't look it either, but then Aikido is a very good style for self defense as it is what could be called 'situational defense' as well as classical.

Thanks everyone for your input
I agree with these two people. I know someone that has learned and put to use a number of times non-turnament style self defense (some didn't walk away). Learning from his teachers is not an option for me because I can't take time off to go to China

With not having any training the first area I would look for is eyes, throught (sp??), nuts, knee. Having been hit hard (not on intentionaly) I know that I could still function if needed unless it was one of the four areas I just listed. So if I could do it chances are most attackers could too.

I'm not that big of person (150lbs and about 18% body fat... average american male is 23%) but feel that I could be very agressive if needed. I do however lack the needed skills to be effective in disabling an attacker(s) unless I'm using a 9mm (which I haven't used enough to feel comfortable with either). I don't make a habit of being in bad places but it's the type of thing that I would rather be prepaired for.

Hopefully I can find something in Iowa City (where I work) next fall after the work day

Thanks again,
Carl

 

[incallisto]

Thanks everyone for your input
I agree with these two people. I know someone that has learned and put to use a number of times non-turnament style self defense (some didn't walk away). Learning from his teachers is not an option for me because I can't take time off to go to China

With not having any training the first area I would look for is eyes, throught (sp??), nuts, knee. Having been hit hard (not on intentionaly) I know that I could still function if needed unless it was one of the four areas I just listed. So if I could do it chances are most attackers could too.

I'm not that big of person (150lbs and about 18% body fat... average american male is 23%) but feel that I could be very agressive if needed. I do however lack the needed skills to be effective in disabling an attacker(s) unless I'm using a 9mm (which I haven't used enough to feel comfortable with either). I don't make a habit of being in bad places but it's the type of thing that I would rather be prepaired for.

Hopefully I can find something in Iowa City (where I work) next fall after the work day

Thanks again,
Carl

Get a job as a Bouncer. That will teach you almost everything you could ever want or need to know.

 

[b0mbrman]

Alright...in all seriousness, there's a difference between the martial arts you use to beat someone into the ground and the martial arts you use to defend an attack and get away...best bet for that sorta thing might be wrist locks, and arm holds...not big sweeping flips...

 

[tcsenter]

Hmmm, in my opinion, schools that teach tournament fighting aren't martial arts schools. More like sports centers.

This describes a number of karate and TKD schools in the US who advertise "self defense". I obviously haven't been to all or even a fraction of the thousands of schools in the country, but I've been to a few and have become acquainted with students from many others. There is an emphasis on competitive fighting in many schools or academies, especially if the school has a team and competes in sanctioned events.

You raise some good points, but if you've ever been to a real martial arts school, you will realise that you ARE taught most of this. Underhand tactics usually aren't taught by most styles as there is a strong emphasis on honour, unless you take Ju-Jitsu. I learnt a ton of underhand tactics with Ju-jitsu as what it literally teaches is street fighting.

I'm not sure what constitutes a "real" martial arts school by your definition. Certainly there are schools who teach credible self-defense methods and tactics, it wasn't my intention to imply there wasn't. But I've seen a lot of stuff being called 'self defense' that isn't, stuff that has resulted in untold numbers of reported black belts being killed or seriously injured by your average street thug.

As for maiming people, I would prefer not to put forth that much effort or take the risk, which is why I have a concealed weapons permit. But, if I have no access to my firearm, then I'll do whatever I have to do to protect myself and it won't give my conscience the slightest bit of grief.

Again, I do not define self defense as being about bragging rights, pride, respect, or teaching someone a lesson, those situations where fairness or ethical concerns are an issue because both parties are mutually consenting and willing combatants who have a choice. If you have any choice to fight or not, it cannot be considered self defense.

What I'm talking about is non-consentual and unprovoked criminal violence where one party has no choice (i.e. who goes home and who goes to the morgue).

 

[Nemesis77]

I have been thinking about going to a Krav Maga class. My friend used to do Krav Maga, but he stopped because he thought that it's just too brutal. I mean, they teach how to poke out eyes, break bones and such. Quick, dirty and effective.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: incallisto
Get a job as a Bouncer. That will teach you almost everything you could ever want or need to know.

I know this man who works as a bouncer. He's also the Sensei at the local Judo-club. He teaches the more advanced students (he himself has a black belt). He's a smallish older japanese guy. Numerous guys have tried to take him down, all of them have failed .

 

[Hammer]

Whatever you decide always make sure you only use as much force as is necessary to discourage that attack. I've been attacked a few times, and most of those were by people that were drunk. You really don't want to give them more than some bruises and knock them on their ass a few times.

Of course, if its a serious situation and you're about evenly matched, the first thing you want to do anyway is break the guys nose. It almost always throws the fight in you favor. It makes it difficult for the other guy to breathe and when his face starts to swell up around his eyes, it will make it harder to see. It really does take the fight out of the person.

 

[Carl Uman]

More good info

Thanks

 

[LostHiWay]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Most attackers will pick what they think is an easy target. If you look like an easy target chances are the attacker is larger and stronger. The only way to counter this in terms of unarmed combat would be a crapload of training. If you are a 140 lb woman and a 220 pound guy is intent on raping you there really isn't much a weekend seminar on defensive training is going to do.

Being a 2nd degree Black Belt in TKD and having wrestled in school for 6 years I feel confident I could handle myself in just about any situation. I'm 6' and 155lbs.

Now for a girl in the situation above I would recommend this: Weird him out. Don't struggle, pretend you have some kind of rape fantasy and tell him to F you hard. Offer to give him head. Most of the time the guy won't know what to think and stop. If he doesn't...then when he put it's in you mouth bite down all the way through it. He'll leave you alone then

 

[Hammer]

Yeah if you a girl, you best bet is biting if you're pinned. If you can get a hand free, defintely go with the eye gouge, that should end it right then and there. Just reach your fingers behind his ear and place your thumb over his eye, and then squeeze as hard as you can.

 

[Daniel]

There have been quite a few martial arts/self defense threads here lately. I think the last one was about the most brutal or deadly. So many people just flat out judge a style which is silly, it depends on the person/teacher/etc. I've known guys that were basically total lunatics who I know would tear apart quite a few people that I know who are black belts in more than one style.

Every style has its pros and cons, getting tricked into believing all you need is to learn a few moves and you are covered for every situation is flat out stupid, more than that is is dangerous. There are many "flavor of the month" types of styles I like to call them that come and go like a fad, the current one being krav maga. I've known people that take it, I've met people that teach it, I've seen the videos, honestly I'm not all that impressed. It strikes me as something that could work for a large man (aka military where they taught some of it) but you take someone that doesn't have a very intense mentality or someone that doesn't have the mass to back the fact that they are throwing elbows and head butts at an attacker and they would get very, very hurt.

The good thing they do teach at some weekend self defense type seminars isn't just a technique or two for you to use but more just the general awareness of your surroundings. They can show you things that some people might take for granted but areas where it isn't safe to walk, how to keep your hands free or out of your pockets, how to try to gauge the intent of people coming near you, etc.

And by permanently stop an attacker, how permanent are we talking here?

 

[ttn1]

Bottom line with self-defense is try your best to keep yourself out of harms way. Be very aware of your surroundings. A lot of women I see stand by their car with 6 bags from the mail while rummaging through their purse for their keys. If I was a mugger, that's what I'm looking for.

There's no such thing as a fair fight in self defense. Lots of good info in this thread. Use every nasty, dirty trick you could ever think of.

Another thing I see is people who walk around with their head down. Stand tall and make eye contact with people. This makes you seem like a much harder target. Cell-phones are making it even worse, people walk around in their own little world.

All I have to say is Be Aware.

When guns are involved, all bets are off. Just remember that alot of people are shot with their own gun. I laugh when I see people buying a handgun for home security. If I were to get anything, it would be an 18" barrel, pistol grip, 12 gauge shotgun. Load it up with buck shot and that's some stopping power. The original point in general direction and pull the trigger weapon.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: hammer09
Yeah if you a girl, you best bet is biting if you're pinned. If you can get a hand free, defintely go with the eye gouge, that should end it right then and there. Just reach your fingers behind his ear and place your thumb over his eye, and then squeeze as hard as you can.

Or stick your finger into his cheek and just pull as hard as you can...neck, balls, eyes...that's the way to go if you're a girl...

 

[chrisjor]

yell at him very loud and threaten to have him banned from AT forums....those things will always frighten me off!! I hate having my feelings hurt by strangers.

 

[NormanBates]

I agree with virusag11

This isnt a boxing match, grab him by the head and jam your thumb in his eye socket, kick him in the nuts until he goes into a coma That or be his victom...

 

[Nefrodite]

glock 18 one full clip will take down anyone hehe

 

[tcsenter]

When guns are involved, all bets are off. Just remember that alot of people are shot with their own gun. I laugh when I see people buying a handgun for home security. If I were to get anything, it would be an 18" barrel, pistol grip, 12 gauge shotgun. Load it up with buck shot and that's some stopping power. The original point in general direction and pull the trigger weapon.

A lot fewer people are shot with their own gun than the media and antigun advocacy groups would have you believe. One study of FBI data showed that it happened in fewer than 1% of defense encounters. Usually, it is the fault of the defender, because he 'pulls' a gun on an intruder but isn't psychologically prepared to pull the trigger, or he believes that the intruder will turn and flee, so he hesitates and that gives the attacker enough time to lunge at the weapon. Another common scenario is that the defender goes outside with his gun to 'investigate' a possible intruder, which is a huge no-no. There are often many places for the intruder to hide, and he will see you long before you see him. There is no reason to go outside and get yourself killed, stay inside and call the police to come do the 'investigating'.

As for close quarters situations, the closer the quarters, the shorter the weapon. A shotgun or any long gun is like a huge lever and the barrel is like a huge 'handle' onto which an intruder can grab and throw you around like rag-doll. If you've ever done any disarmament training, a pistol is far more difficult to disarm than a long gun because a pistol, especially one with a short barrel, presents very little or nothing to grab ahold of and apply leverage to.

If the quarters are so close that having the firearm taken away from you is an issue, you DO NOT want a shotgun or any long gun. A pistol or even a good knife would be a far better choice.