swatparent

Most of the time victims get shot point-blank, so avoidance is the best protection. I don't think wrestling them is going to do much. You could consider carrying a licensed weapon, if it's legal in your jurisdiction, but if they are there first, it may be difficult to get to your weapon in time. Personally I have not chosen that option, but know people who have.

There's an interesting Supreme Court case about that now, I don't know if it was decided yet, if not it will be soon.

MichaelNKat

Carrying a firearm for defense in a mugging situation is a very poor choice for most people. First, as swatparent points out, attacks with guns normally happen within close proximity, usually within a 7 yard distance if not "point blank", and therefore once it becomes apparent that lethal force is appropriate there is often no opportunity to deploy your own weapon. Second, using a firearm for self defense, particularly in close quarters, requires extensive training to avoid hesitation and fumbling and allowing a perpetrator to get close enough to take your own weapon and use it on you. Third, and since a lot of this discussion has involved student safety and self defense, the last thing in the world we need are students who, while of legal age, are still in the throes of developing adult judgement and emotional maturity running around in or around college campuses with guns. Finally, carry a handgun creates a risk that one's mindset will change to no longer giving priority to avoidance, thereby creating an increased risk of exposure to the very kinds of situations you were trying to avoid to begin with and therefore increasing the likelihood that a gun will be used.

Jolynne, having a "few physical tricks up your sleeve" for "horsing around with other guys" is not what self defense for the street is about. It is not about wrestling, "judo flips" or fancy technique you can show off with friends. It's not pretty, it's not "fun"; it's ugly. It is about quickly inflicting pain and causing damage to startle and cause an attacker to momentarily stop so as to give you a chance to escape and run. It's about driving your thumbs into an attacker's eye sockets and pushing their eyeballs into their skull until the attacker loosens his grip and gives you a chance to run, it's about biting an attacker's body part like you are tearing a t-bone steak off the bone until the attacker loosens his grip and gives you a chance to run, it's about grabbing the thumb of a hand that is holding you, with both of your hands, and breaking the thumb so that an attacker loosens his grip and gives you a chance to run. A good self defense course is not about "martial arts" or "street fighting", it's about creating awareness and a mindset that will enable you to apply some simple techniques designed to enable you to run away, not overpower and beat your attacker up.

sevenhills

Don't forget stomping on their feet. Nelsons and half nelsons aren't that hard to fight off with proper training, even with a physically, much larger attacker.

paying3tuitions

^^I got scared just reading post #62, but thanks.

Going back to my own earlier posting where I said just hand over your wallet, purse, ipod or whatever...my S-2 told me, "wrong -- THROW the object at least 10 feet away from your own body, into a bush, over a fence -- so the guy will look in that direction, and chase after the object. Don't clutch it inward. Get the desirable object away from your own body.

While he's chasing after the object, you run in the opposite direction."

MichaelNKat

paying3tuitions, I agree that compliance is a good tactic if you are simply being confronted, have not been attacked and what is at risk is only the loss of a material possession. Far better to give up a possession than risk the harm of a physical confrontation. My earlier post scared me too, which is why I prefer the immortal words of Monty Python, "Run Away!"

swatparent

I don't think that throwing something is a good idea, as anything that can provoke someone, will. Better to just hand it over. This may or may not protect you from getting shot, but compliance does work at times. Noncompliance definitely does NOT work!

Jolynne Smyth

Interesting, MichaelNKat. I had an idea that's what self-defense might be and I know from my son's karate training that--of course--avoidance is the very best first (& second) response.

I just think it would be good to know what to do if you are backed against a wall & have run out of other options---all the things you described (eye gouging, etc.) would be useful, if, as you said, you have the proper training and can implement them under stress. Good to know.

I have to say I still think that knowing how to 'get someone off you' by knowing the ordinary physical weak-points, etc. would be of use, generally, for a guy and would give some confidence. Particularly when my son was in late middle school/early high school some boys could get really (it looked to me) physically tough on each other.

Being a girl, I was horrified, but have come to realize that's what a lot of boys/guys 'just do.' Still, in this normal roughousing, why should the guy who's less strong/adept have less of a chance to come out on top? At the time my son would occasionally roughouse I was a pacifist & would just wish it would stop.

Now I see it's part of ordinary, male development -- just wish my son had learned to fight in ways he could compensate for not being the biggest (he now is tall & lifts weights so doesn't deal w/that...plus everyone has matured). If it might arise again, I'd just want him to be confident.

I think we are probably talking about 2 separate issues here (street self-defense, how-to-win-at-casual fighting). I think they are both worthwhile, though (self-defense more important, obviously).

Thanks for the thoughts!

swatparent

JS: I think that you are not factoring in guns enough in street crime and robberies. The few instances recently that I have seen where victims have fought back successfully is if they have a gun and shoot first. There have been a few carjackings recently where that happened and the victim actually was unharmed. Generally, a lot of those carjackings wind up the other way, with the victim being hurt.

What kind of "casual fighting" are you privy to? I really have not heard about this type of fightling vis a vis crime.

alwaysamom

Michael, thank you for the information on the improving situation in Philly. It's good to hear and I'm hopeful that that trend will continue. It's a wonderful city, of which I have such fond memories. I truly hope that things can be turned around and that the underlying issues can begin to be addressed. Coincidentally, my H is headed to Philly this week on business.

All of my Ds have taken self-defence courses, which provided the right balance of avoidance strategies and defence techniques. What they learned is exactly the type of 'unpretty' maneuvers that Michael describes.

It is my belief that the last thing we need is for even more people to be armed with guns.

swatparent

I agree with you "always a MOM", that more guns would not be good in a philosophical sense, but I am afraid that ordinary citizens are turning to them because of crime. The Supreme Court case from DC is an interesting and timely one.

Unfortunately, I don't think there are that many cases where jumping on an armed man and scratching his eyes has done much except trigger his gun.

Jolynne Smyth

swatparent--my take on guns is that they are often taken (by the perp, from the victim, then used against them). While they have their uses, they are often mis-used (and I just wouldn't want my 19 yo son carting around a loaded weapon...just ripe for a bad scenario).

Casual fighting---referring to guys horsing around w/each other. I never did this growing up as a girl, so in retrospect re: my son, think that knowing how to get out of a headlock by a buddy would be a useful skill.

arachnophobia12

Thank you, JHS, for your insightful (and true) post.

swatparent

JS: I amnot suggesting that your son carry a gun, it is better that he avoid dangerous areas.

However, a doctor friend of mine who specializes in urban trauma and his doctor girlfriend carry guns at all times outside if the hospital and have extensive training and, of course, gun licenses. They see what happens in thier city and although they are peaceful, feel more secure in the area where they work. It is an individual choice.

As to "horsing around" I do not think this is universal among boys. If it is to the point of needing self-defense classes, then it is time to get new friends.

MichaelNKat

swatparent, I don't think anyone is suggesting that you you respond to an assailant with a gun - or even a knife- by "jumping on" him and "scratching his eyes". There is no question that it would most likely provoke use of the weapon or even in the case of a gun result in an unintended discharge. Moreover, close quarters combat between an unarmed person and an armed assailant requires extensive training and experience in how to neutralize a weapon, which is way beyond what anyone is going to get out of a self defense class and most martial arts classes (which are sport, not combat, oriented). I recall several years ago a doctor in his 30's, in my neighborhood, who had a black belt in karate and attempted to physically stop a burglar in his home who was armed a gun. The burglar was no more than 5 feet from the doctor and as fast as the doctor was (he was a "black belt", after all), he ended up very dead.

Whether to throw what an armed assailant is demanding is a very situational and tough call. It really turns on what kind of weapon the assailant has and if you have concluded that the assailant intends to use his weapon regardless of your compliance. In general, simply turning over what the assailant wants is statistically your best odds. If you conclude otherwise, however, I would not throw the object away from the assailant, which could be viewed simply as an act of defiance with limited distractive value (since once the object is out of the assailants visual field, all that is left is you). Instead, I would toss what the assailant wanted, as well as everything else in my hands such as a coat or packages, at the assailant at a height between the assailant's chest and face. This serves a couple of purposes: suddenly there are several objects in the same field of vision where you are located resulting in visual distraction or obstruction, there is a natural reaction of raising one's hands when objects are coming towards you, particularly your head or face, resulting in further obstructing vision and tying up the assailants hands, and hopefully it results in the assailant's weapon no longer being trained on you as his hands and arms move. And as you do it, run like hell yelling for help. If the assailant has a knife, just run as fast as you can in a straight line away from the assailant. If the assailant has a gun, you want to add lateral movement to your direction of travel in an effort to move out of the assailants immediate field of fire; if an assailant with a gun must swing his arms laterally to keep you in his field of fire, you increase the chances that he will miss if he shoots. It bears reiteration though; this is a last resort desperate tactic when you believe you are dead either way. Otherwise, just be compliant and turn over what the assailant wants.

As to carrying a gun for self defense, there are so many factors that go into whether it is a good idea for a person that you could have an exhaustive discussion on this alone. I am extensively trained and licensed to carry a firearm. For every person who states (perhaps accurately or perhaps not) that the difference between them being injured or killed in an assault or car jacking or not was the presence of their own weapon, there are others for whom having having a gun didn't do a damn bit of good and may have resulted in an escalation to what was otherwise avoidable victim or bystander fatalities.

Jolynne Smyth

MichaelNKat,
Appreciate the information!

"It bears reiteration though; this is a last resort desperate tactic when you believe you are dead either way. Otherwise, just be compliant and turn over what the assailant wants."

Would you have some indicators for someone to know whether it's better to be compliant or better to toss everything at the assailant & run?

Thanks.