self defense

Smart vs. Dumb Self-Defense

/ hsoi

It’s wonderful to see Adam from LowTechCombat back again. The website’s been revamped, and the articles are once-again being published.

His first post-revamp article is SMART SELF DEFENCE VS DUMB SELF DEFENCE (he’s from Australia, thus “defence”), and it’s a good one.

He’s right:

The sad fact is most in the self defence industry teach dumb self defence and really don’t encourage a lot of thinking from their students.

[…]

The dumb self defence approach is teaching people what to do when there is an attacker right in front of you; Nothing before that time.

[…]

This sort of practise is clearly needed. These are the sorts of skills you need when everything else has failed. As a last resort, you need to know what to do when there is an attacker standing in front of you. We cannot wish this possibility away.

The real problem comes when this approach (an attacker is right in front of you) is your only approach to self defence. This makes it dumb self defence.

Self-defense should not start when it’s too late. What’s the best self-defense? Never having to defend yourself. This usually means awareness, avoidance, deterrence, de-escalation.

And like Adam alludes to, none of this is sexy, none of this is particularly fun to study and train (at least on the surface, to many people). But if there’s anything that’s really going to keep you safe and out of harm’s way, that’s what will do it.

Always remember John Farnam’s famous quip: “Don’t go to stupid places; don’t associate with stupid people; don’t do stupid things. We will add to that, be in bed by 10 o’clock.” That’s pretty much awareness, avoidance, deterrence, de-escalation, and it’s what helps you live a safer, better life.

Again, “unarmed” doesn’t equate to “not dangerous”

/ hsoi

[Christy] Mack’s injuries included 10 broken bones, a broken nose, missing and broken teeth, a fractured rib and a severely ruptured liver from a kick to her side.

Typically when people use the term “unarmed”, they mean “doesn’t have a weapon” (knife, gun, baseball bat, screwdriver, hammer, crowbar, etc.). As if somehow that means the person couldn’t be dangerous, or couldn’t inflict severe bodily harm.

He allegedly forced her to strip naked and repeatedly punched and kicked her, breaking several of her teeth.

Look at her pictures:

That’s the sort of damage an “unarmed” person can inflict. And honestly, she’s lucky; I’ve seen worse damage at the hands of “unarmed” individuals.

So tell me again why you think “unarmed” means “not dangerous”?

(full story)

What can we learn – Thalia Heffernan

/ hsoi

A couple weeks ago, 20-year old model Thalia Heffernan was attacked on the streets of Dublin. I’m glad to hear Ms. Heffernan is doing alright. After reading her story, I think there are some important lessons we can all learn from what she went through.

I am going to refer to two stories. This one from herald.ie and this story from independent.ie.

The attack happened at 4:20 AM around the Dublin city center. Attacks can happen at any time of day and at any location. This does remind me of John Farnam’s famous quip: “Don’t go to stupid places; don’t associate with stupid people; don’t do stupid things. We will add to that, be in bed by 10 o’clock.” Ms. Heffernan didn’t appear to have too much choice tho, as it appears she was on her way to work. In such a case, it behooves us to increase our awareness of our surroundings and take greater precautions and measures to ensure our personal safety.

Especially if you’re walking alone, which it appears Ms. Heffernan was.

“No older than around 18, this young girl hit me three or more times in the face, elbowed and shoved me in an attempt to pull my backpack off my arm, while another young guy came behind me and grabbed the other side. Nearly pulling my jumper and arms with them, they ran away with everything I had.”

When people think about potential attackers, I guarantee you the gender will always be male. Society tends to view women as victims, not attackers, not aggressors. But reality is that an attacker can be anyone: male or female, young or old. You must expand your notion of who could be an attacker, else you will blind to the possibilities.

The assault was physical.

“What’s worse is that there was nothing I could do to even attempt to defend myself, despite screaming and crying after them,” she added. “I knew if I tried to fight back that it would end badly, and maybe even with me in hospital.

“Even now, a number of hours later, I’m still shaking writing this.. No matter how hard you train or how well your capable of fighting your corner, young kids in gangs like this can render you completely useless.

I’m not sure what training she had. I searched around and only found references to her being big on fitness, so maybe she just exercises a lot, but nothing gave me the impression she received any sort of self-defense or combative/martial-arts training.

If I could speak with her, I’d like to inquire about “there was nothing I could do to even attempt to defend myself”. There sure is a lot you can do to defend yourself, because screaming and crying certainly isn’t effective. What I wonder is about her mindset. Has she ever considered in her 20 years of life that someone might want to attack her? Has she ever contemplated what she would do in response? Has she taken steps to enable a useful response? Too many people walk through life never considering that bad things might happen to them, and taking steps that could help them address that situation. Have you ever stopped to think about yourself? And what have you done to address it? Denial doesn’t count.

Regarding her last sentence, she elaborates:

“They’re ruthless and will do anything to get what they want. I don’t understand how anyone could ever even consider doing that to another person. I hope I can help the gardai in identifying at least some of them, and eventually have them all pay for what they’ve done not only to me but countless others.”

“I don’t understand how anyone could ever even consider doing that to another person”.

Let that sink in.

You have to know, there are 7 billion people in this world and I guarantee most of them do not think like you.  There are some people in this world that think so far distant from you that yes you cannot consider nor fathom how someone could be that way. But that doesn’t mean such people don’t exist. Just watch the news every day, and you’ll see countless stories of deviant behavior. The best thing we can do is acknowledge such people do exist, that there are horrible people out there that are ruthless and will do anything to get what they want — including destroying you and not caring one bit.

So what are you going to do about it?

Because another key take-away from this event? The only help the police (the gardai) can give is possible hope of catching the attackers after the fact. No one was around to help her. The only person that could have come to her aid, was herself.

Now, the catwalk queen who has travelled the world alone for her work, says she will take more caution when travelling alone

“I just wasn’t expecting it to happen to me – you never think it would happen to yourself en route to work,” she added of the incident, which Gardai are investigating.

I’ve always been quite an independent person, I travel alone a lot, I’m on my own quite often – after that, I definitely am a bit shook.

“I’ll be a bit more cautious and careful.”

Again, she lived never expecting, never acknowledging such a thing could happen. And when it did, all she could do was be astonished and a victim, instead of meeting the violence and making it stop.

I hope that being “more cautious and careful” will translate over into actually taking greater steps to help herself when violence again comes her way. We all need a wake-up call to the realities of the world, I hope this is hers and she uses the lessons wisely. I hope you can too.

We need to understand violence

/ hsoi

Wim Demeere wrote an excellent piece about The death of common sense regarding violence.

It starts right off:

We live in an age where having knowledge about how violence actually works is frowned upon. Having experience with it is viewed even worse.

So very true. It’s sad tho. We love to go on about how “knowledge is power”, the importance of education, and look down upon ignorance. Yet, when it comes to issues of violence, people prefer ignorance.

I get it. Violence is ugly and something we would rather not deal with. However the ugly truth is violence exists, has always, will always, and the simple fact that the more you know about it the more you can contend with it (including avoiding it and not becoming a victim of it), the better off you’ll be. Again, knowledge is power.

Wim continues discussion of how we got to this point, because it wasn’t very long ago that one was actually expected to know how to fight and how to contend with violence. That doesn’t mean you’re out to start it, but it does mean you know how to deal with it when it crosses your path.

Now granted, that we’ve reduced a “need” for violence in society shows progress. We have become more peaceful, more civil. This is actually a good sign. However the converse is that it comes at the expense of ignorance. And if we continue to be ignorant, then we will eventually fall victim. All progress toward our “peaceful societal growth” stops and likely regresses.

Wim presents a perfect example of this ignorance, of this regression.

Have you see that cell phone case that looks like a gun? If not, click through to Wim’s article to see it.

It’s not just stupid, it’s dangerous and likely going to get the owner in trouble (or even killed).

Does that mean you have to let everything slide? No, of course not. Some things are worth fighting and dying for. But a truckload of things are not and in this age of social justice warriors and internet wisdom, that seems to have been lost. When it comes to violence, common sense is dying at an ever increasing rate. When you look at the comments on the internet about this cellphone case, the “it’s my right!” crowd is extremely well represented. Contrast that with those in law enforcement, the military and the other professions where violence is a daily occurrence: they all see what a potential for disaster this case is.

If you don’t understand why this case is a bad idea, I’ll be happy to inform you.

If after that you still wish to carry such a case, you’re welcome to. You just cannot be surprised if you suffer the consequences of your poor choice.

And the death of accepting responsibility for yourself (and your poor choices) is also happening, but that’s another discussion.

It is important for us to understand violence. It’s like anything else in this world: the more we can know about it, the more we can understand it, the more we can make rational and reasoned choices and decisions regarding matters involving it. That doesn’t make you a bad person, that doesn’t mean you’ll be a dangerous person, that doesn’t mean you will go on a killing spree. No, it just means you’re an educated person, and that ought to help make the world a bit better.

Better to fight back than to do nothing

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

This was a refreshing piece to see reported in the mainstream news.

Austin NBC affiliate KXAN posted an article, Fighting for your life in an active shooter situation.

SAN MARCOS, Texas (KXAN) — Theaters, malls and schools are places you’re not supposed to be afraid of. But none are immune to active shooter situations.

Experts with Texas State University’s Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Program (ALERRT) say they don’t want people to live in fear but to understand these situations can happen. By taking a few minutes to think how you would react right now, may save your life later.

The article starts right off acknowledging the reality. And even better, suggesting that a little bit of forethought would be a wise and potentially life-saving action.

This is refreshing to see!

“It’s natural to be scared, everybody is scared when someone’s trying to cause them harm,” said ALERRT executive director, Pete Blaire. “Our first recommendation is to avoid the attacker, if you can do that. If for some reason you can’t, deny access to your location, keep them from getting to you. And that defending yourself is the last resort.”

Open spaces, like a movie theater, leave you with the fewest options. ALERRT trainers say it’s alright to duck down, but don’t stay put.

“One thing we don’t want to see you do is what we call ‘hide and hope.’ Which is where someone hides behind something and hopes the shooter doesn’t find them. If the shooter does find you, doesn’t leave many options,” said Blaire.

This is all solid stuff. The suggested course of action is essentially: “Run. Hide. Fight”. About 3 years ago the City of Houston with funds from DHS created an excellent video on that course of action. It’s becoming the mantra for dealing with active shooter events, and with good reason. Yes I know, you’ve got your CHL and you’re just ready to save the day. Well, we all draw our lines in different places in terms of what we will and won’t be willing to die for, and how context and personal situation matter. Whatever your decision, just determine your line ahead of time and be well-prepared to execute your plan.

The article continues:

He says if it does come down to defending yourself, better to fight back than to do nothing.

Blaire teaches people to grab a hold of the gun and get it pointed away from you.

He says when you’re fighting for your life, you don’t have to fight fairly.

And this is such a great thing to see printed in the mainstream media. That it’s better to fight back than to do nothing. Or to more clearly phrase this: it’s better to fight back than to die… better to fight back than to be murdered… better to fight back than be executed. Yeah, fighting back is no guarantee you’ll live, but not fighting back is a fair assurance you’ll die. At least for me, I choose to live.

I also like that KXAN was willing to print that you don’t have to fight fair! It’s reasonable for people to expect fairness and to abide by some sort of “code” of behavior/ethics. And usually people expect others in society to have some sort of “code” as well, and that likely our codes are somewhat in the same ballpark. Realize that if someone is trying to kill you, they have demonstrated they do not have the same code as you; they may have some code, but it’s nothing like yours. There is nothing to say they will “fight fair”, and essentially that means you have to be willing to fight “unfair”. It’s the sort of thing where it’s considered bad form to hit a guy in the crotch, but an active shooter situation is not a time to practice gentlemanly manners, y’know? You need to give yourself permission ahead of time that should you find yourself in an active shooter situation, you allow yourself to do whatever it takes to come out alive.

What really got me about the article? The closing statement:

Right now, ALERRT only trains law enforcement, but has recently partnered with a company to bring the training to the public.

KXAN will keep you posted on when that training begins.

They will keep us posted when such training for the public begins.

It’s great to see the mainstream media supporting and encouraging activities to help people stay alive and stay safe.

Self-Defense Myths – Let’s put some to rest

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

Melody Lauer interviewed some of the best self-defense instructors out there in an attempt to dispell some of the self-defense myths that just won’t die.

An excellent article rich in information.

Go. Read. Now.

 

Handshakes aren’t always polite

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Greg Ellifritz writes about how a simple handshake can be used as a ruse to get dangerously close to you.

I feel conflicted about personal safety techniques that make you come across as rude or unfriendly, because the majority of the time the situation is innocuous and now you just look like a jerk. But, there’s always a way to handle the situation that helps you maintain a friendly rapport yet keep you safe. Greg’s article offers a few such suggestions for dealing with this case.

One I recently picked up and will work to employ is how to disengage from street approaches. You know the situation: dude walks up to you asking for a cigarette or a light or the time, and there’s a host of ways to break off contact. A favorite of fellow KR Training instructor Tom Hogel is to say “Yeah, about 4:30” and keep on walking. It works because it’s an unexpected response to their script and resets their OODA Cycle. The response I recently picked up comes from William Aprill. His response is “No, but THANKS!” and saying “thanks” in a very cheerful and earnest tone. I like this because it resets the OODA Cycle, it responds and ends the contact, and you don’t risk coming off as rude — which I think matters not so much to dude, but in the eyes of others, especially if this happens when you’re in the company of friends that may not regard personal safety in the same light as yourself.

What stood out to me more from Greg’s article tho was his closing remarks regarding handshakes and open carry:

Hock Hockheim also has some interesting information on handshake problems in this article.  Have any of you open carriers considered this ruse?  What if someone approached you in a public place and said “I commend you for carrying your gun openly and appreciate that you are providing a visual deterrent against criminals.”  After saying this, he extends his hand to shake yours.  Would you shake?  If you are carrying your gun openly in a holster without retention, it might not be such a good idea!

When you assume…

/ hsoi

Whether you acknowledge it or not, you have a concept of what (your) attacker will look like.

Ask anyone about violent crime, about being attacked, and ask them to describe their attacker. Oh, they may not have fine-details down, like the color of their eyes, but they do have some sort of notion about the person – or the sort of person – that would attack them.

Often times it’s male, probably in the 18-30 age range. They’d probably be dressed in some sort of “covering garb”, like a mask or something else that obscures the face, with dark, long-sleeved clothing; people don’t imagine a Hawaiian shirt and Bermuda shorts.

As well, they might imagine the person’s circumstance, like they’re just some drug-addict looking for a quick score.

Stereotypes come from somewhere, usually seeded in truth. The problem comes when we start to base life-important decisions upon stereotypes.

I recently came across a discussion on Facebook on the topic of firearms. A person with a fairly anti-gun stance was coming from an angle of “assault weapons are stupid and unnecessary for home defense”. He said:

Most criminals look for soft, easy options. If you
don’t have an alarm system, but your neighbour does, and the crook is in your neighbourhood, guess what? Yup, you are getting broken into. Same goes for screens, and doors. They look for the soft options.

Now, he is correct. Fundamental rules of home safety/defense really start with other matters such as having locks and using them, having alarm systems and using them, and other things you can do to make your home a less-appealing target (relative to your neighbors). But this is not a discussion of home safety/defense.

What stood out to me was his assumption of who would be coming to break into your home, and under what circumstances. And thus, based upon those stereotypes and assumptions, whether guns (or a particular type of gun) was or was not appropriate/worthy/legitimate of use.

Back in April, John Hearne was on Ballistic Radio discussing the Newhall Massacre of 1970. If you’re unfamiliar with the incident, give a listen to the episode, or you should at least read about it.

Two men, Bobby Davis and Jack Twinning, were well-established violent felons before the incident, determined to not go back to jail and not be captured. In Newhall, they murdered 4 CHP officers. As they fled the scene of the initial shootout, the men split up. Davis came upon a camper, violently assaulted the owner, and took off in the camper. Twinning broke into a nearby home, and took the occupants hostage.

How do men like Davis and Twinning fit into your assumptions?

These were sophisticated, violent criminals, determined to do whatever it took to escape or die trying. They came upon innocent, uninvolved people – like yourself – and inflicted violence upon them for, what would appear to the victim as, “no good reason”.

Was this an anomalous situation? Certainly. But like many things, statistics are of little comfort when you’re the exception.

It is dangerous and risky to your life and the lives of those you love to predicate behavior upon assumptions, especially when there are solid facts that you could better predicate upon. Take time to examine your assumptions, discarding what is incorrect, and revising to make better.

Empty hands can still lead to tragedy

/ hsoi

The punch, it’s alleged, was consensual — a mutually agreed-upon yet ultimately tragic attempt between two high school students at making amends.

The lone blow outside a Lake Roesiger cabin early Sunday morning ended one life and landed an 18-year-old classmate in the Snohomish County Jail for investigation of manslaughter.

Full story here. But if you don’t want to read it all, the gist is one kid hit another kid’s car. They had a bit of a confrontation about it, and in the end opted to settle their differences by letting one punch the other. By all accounts it was a consensual and mutually agreed upon resolution, even shaking hands and smoking a cigarette together. The one kid punched the other kid, who fell down, struck his head on the pavement, and never regained consciousness.

It seems evident no one meant harm here, just a way to settle a debt. Alas, it’s turned into a terrible situation, and I hope things will turn out as best as they can for all involved.

I present this story as yet another illustration that empty-hands can still be deadly.

The changing face of violence in the UK

/ hsoi

From Chuck Rives, an article about how violence in the UK is getting… worse.

Horrific wounds have been caused by screwdrivers and spoons as attackers look to circumvent knife-carrying laws by switching to “improvised weapons”.

[…]

Doctors say a trend has emerged of teenagers being stabbed in the rectum – a practice known among gangs as “dinking” that can leave the victim requiring a stoma bag for the rest of their life.

[…]

Chris Aylwin, a consultant surgeon at St Mary’s hospital, said: “There seems to be a decreasing value of people’s lives. One of the more worrying features that we have certainly seen are stabbings around the buttocks and thighs. People don’t do that without good reason.

[…]

Duncan Bew, the clinical lead for trauma and emergency surgery at Kings’ College hospital, said: “There is an intention to leave someone with an outward sign that they have been punished by a gang – a stoma bag or some other injury to ‘clip their wings’.”

You should read the entire article as there’s just too much to detail here.

Here’s my take-homes:

Bans Don’t Stop Violence

UK essentially bans guns, so people turn to knives. Now knives are being severely restricted, and so they’re turning to screwdrivers and spoons and other improvised weapons.

Ban all you want, it doesn’t stop people from engaging in the base behavior (how’s that “War on Drugs” working out?). If evil people wish to do evil things, they will always find a way. Instead of focusing on the tools, how about focusing on the root evil(s)? You only have so much time, money, and energy in your lifetime, so why waste precious resources on ineffective solutions?

Statistics Tell Certain Stories

According to City Hall, the number of knife assaults causing injury rose 7.7 per cent across London between April and September this year, compared to the same period last year. There were 335 incidents in September – 51 per cent up on the 222 recorded in March.

People love to quote how “gun violence” is low in the UK, and that it is. Maybe it is support that “banning guns” leads to less “gun violence”. But “banning guns” does not lead to a safer society, a society where there is less violence.

People like to quote homicide and murder rates as indication of how things are getting better or worse. Alas, murder rates only tell part of the story, because for it to be murder the victim has to die. Every year medical ability improves, and these days if you make it to the Emergency Room with any sort of vital signs, your chances are extremely high you will live due to the miracle of modern medicine. Thus, at most your attack will only be classified as “aggravated assault” – what used to be called “attempted murder” – and consequently “murder rates going down” are in part due to good ER’s, not reduction in crime.

Consider the contents of the article: the very intent of the attack is not to kill, but to severely maim and inflict not death but a lifetime of agony and suffering. How does this affect your statistics? And do the statistics really matter when you’re the one spending the rest of your life in a wheelchair with a colostomy bag?

Get Medical Training

A week after Joel was attacked, the trauma team at the Royal London saved a 16-year-old stabbed in the leg. “It was a really deep wound,” Mr Konig said. “That struck me as real intent, and that was just shocking. [In a week] we had one dead, one survived. Left alone, these people would all die.

“Passers-by were excellent at putting pressure on his groin and stopping him bleeding to death right there. If members of the public are having to come to your assistance to stop you bleeding to death, it’s like soldiers relying on their buddies in a war zone. If we have to start educating people how to stop someone bleeding to death, that does change things.”

This doesn’t mean you need to be a medic, an EMT, or anything of the sort. But get some basic First Aid training. Then maybe get some more advanced care in things like Wilderness First Aid, or other training that goes beyond “boo-boos and bee stings” to help you deal with things like severe bleeding and when and how to use a tourniquet.

Carry some form of medical equipment. Heck, my Dad has always carried a single Band-Aid in his wallet: it’s not a tourniquet, but you’d be amazed at how often it’s come in handy.

Some People Are Just Sick

I’m sure you are a positive person that surrounds yourself with other positive, uplifting, productive, contributing, and generally “good” people. Thus chances are you may not realize or really fathom that the world is filled with horrible people. Thankfully they are a minority, but they are still there and all it takes is one to ruin things.

Some people are just twisted and sick. Consider the attackers in this story: they are out to cause their victim a lifetime of suffering. I mean, intentionally stabbing someone in the rectum to cause the victim a lifetime of difficultly? How fucked up is that? Sorry for the language, but there’s no other way to describe such a vile, despicable act. It’s truly the mindset of a sick individual.

It’s important to accept the world contains such scum. You don’t have to like it nor tolerate it, but admitting and accepting they exist improves your ability to address the realities of the problem.

Real Solutions

Mr Bew is a trustee of Growing Against Gangs and Violence, a partnership between the Association of Surgeons, Metropolitan Police and Home Office that aims to end gang and serious youth violence through proactive work and “pupil power”. This Autumn it has reached 17,080 students in 70 schools in 11 boroughs – four times as many students as two years ago.

He added: “Trauma centres have made a massive difference to mortality and morbidity in the last couple of years, particularly in that younger group. The challenge for us is how we stop the kids coming to us in the first place.”