A question about attacks and response levels

Posted by: RangerG

A question about attacks and response levels - 12/10/05 10:26 AM

While this subject is in the general discussion forum, I wanted to post somewhat the same thing here for the Krav and SD system folks to discuss.

Our response to armed attack is viewed as brutal by other MA forms. Any of you who have learned the handgun disarms and knife disarms know that there is the potential that you could kill your attacker..one too many barrel strikes to the face because the dork keeps trying to grab you...or as you duck under his arm with your escape from knife to the throat from the back...the knife ends up in his kidney.....a couple of dozen times...

I am of the mind that an armed attack on me under any circumstance is attempted murder...and I will respond with maximum force and bruality...redirect, control and destroy..then escape. I don't have a couple of seconds to play 50 questions with my attacker to determine if he just wants my cash or if he wants to add to his kill list for gang status.

What is the general consensus between us Kravists and SD folks?

Jeff Jimmo made a comment once during a seminar he was teaching on some Krav tactics and dirty fighting...it PO's some traditional MA folks off..but I found it profound..

"There is what looks cool in the dojo...and then there is what will keep you alive on the streets"

Those folks who do not train in Krav or like SD may not understand what I am saying, or may take offense...Please understand that I am not intending to do that... You almost have to be training in Krav or like system to understand the mindset...

Opinions?
Posted by: csinca

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 12/10/05 11:29 AM

Ranger,

When I started Martial Arts in TKD, my second instructor seem to focus on the "what works in the street" side of things. We were working the lead side kick to the knee and you always went for the throat if it were available. In my opinion, if you land a solid side kick to a weight bearing knee and a ridgehand to the throat in your combinations, somebody's going to get to know the emergency room. At the time I was looking for other "friendlier" options so I started aikido. In aikido when we learned knife defenses, we were taught "never touch the knife and leave it in (I mean with) the attacker".

Now that I've got some Krav experience I think the Krav mentality and training method may be what differentiates it as a more aggressive response.

Looking at type of attack versus response level, I personally believe that once a weapon comes out things change. Some knucklehead taking a swing at me because he's drunk, showing off or thinks I "looked at him or his girl" is one thing. But taking out a knife means you're trying to kill me and I take offense to that.

Of the various instructors that I've worked with, I think most share a more pragmatic view, regardless of their art.

Chris
Posted by: Tolyn1007

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 12/10/05 04:32 PM

I think this has been one of the toughest things for me to re-train my people in. As LE, they were taught never to strike people in certain areas, i.e., don't strike to the throat, groin, kidneys, etc. It's reinforced in impact weapons training and arrest control and compliance.

Then here I come along and start saying, "Look, there's only one reason why someone would want to choke you and that's to kill you. If they pull a knife on you or they pull a gun on you, you can reasonably assume that their intentions are not to ask you out to the prom so when you attack, you attack aggressively, decisively and repeatedly and you make sure that pr*ck doesn't get back up so that he can attack you again." This was a shock to them and required a paradigm shift in their thinking. Some of them still consider it too agressive as if kicking someone in the groin is more violent then shooting them which is the level of force that they would be at in those situations listed.

I think the attacks KM deploys are appropriate for the force being used against us. They rely less on fine motor skills then traditional MA techniques so they look more crude and more brutal but they are also effective.
Posted by: globetrotter

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 12/10/05 07:54 PM

I have said this several times - I am the most peaceful person in the world - there is nothing that would get me to use violence that didn't involve a direct, imidiate and life threatening level of force, as far as I am concerned.

that being the case, I will not get involved in any use of force that is below the maximum level. I am a fat old man. I have no intention of trying to convince somebody that he will get hurt if he attacks me. If I get involved in a conflict I will be attacking eyes, throat, knees, kidneys, base of spine, and testicles, and I will be putting every ounce of my force and meaness behind it. one of us will be visiting the hospital or the morgue. I also have no intention of stopping until I feel that I have the threat completly under control. I was brought up with the idea of "kill verification" - we used to tap downed enemies with a few rounds to the head, before we let them get behind us. I am not going to walk away if I think somebody might be getting up and following me in a second, and catch at a possible disadvantage.
Posted by: Lori

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 12/10/05 09:30 PM

Quote:

Jeff Jimmo made a comment once during a seminar he was teaching on some Krav tactics and dirty fighting...it PO's some traditional MA folks off..but I found it profound..

"There is what looks cool in the dojo...and then there is what will keep you alive on the streets"





This exact quote is what made me choose Krav.

My daughters are currently in Karate. I've had the opportunity to watch them progress, and though I admire the art, I started to realize that it would take them a long, long time before they could effectively apply what they've learned in a real life self defense situation.

I chose Krav because I needed something practical (our instructor says with the first class, you "hit the ground running"). The girls are still in Karate, but the minute they're old enough, I'll switch them to Krav as well.
Posted by: ShikataGaNai

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 12/11/05 03:20 AM

I'll back all this up by simply saying I like my brains and I intend to keep them and all my other organs inside my body. My life is precious to me and to a significant amount of other people and I don't believe that anyone would want to take it for anything other than malicious reasons. The world and the people in are not "kill or be killed" by default, but there are killers out there and there are a lot of crazy a$$h013s who would just as soon rip your face off as look at you and they don't deserve the pleasure.
Posted by: RavenG4

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/06/06 12:31 PM

If someone's pulling a gun on me I'm going to make sure they either end up no longer able to do that to anyone else or seriously enough hurt that they won't be doing that for a long while. If they pull out a gun the usually intend to kill you. If that's the case I'll make sure it's them not me.
Posted by: KoshoBob

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/06/06 12:52 PM

Quote:

Jeff Jimmo made a comment once during a seminar he was teaching on some Krav tactics and dirty fighting...it PO's some traditional MA folks off..but I found it profound..

"There is what looks cool in the dojo...and then there is what will keep you alive on the streets"

Opinions?




I come from a traditional dojo and we have the same attitude. Ranger has been there. No trophies, no point sparring. Just take care of business and go home.

Most dojos in America are not traditional and that is the problem. A traditional art had to be effect or you died in battle.

We teach levels of response. Someone pulling a knife or gun will get maximum response. Better to be tried by 12 then carried by 6.
Posted by: tuxette

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/06/06 03:38 PM

Not sure about where you guys live but over here, it is perfectly legal to disarm an attacker and smack him around a bit (so to speak). It is *not* legal to take the attacker's weapon and stab or shoot him.
Posted by: dhatcher

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/24/06 01:51 PM

I trained in Chinese and American Kenpo Karate for several years when I was a teenager. Now that I'm a little older and training in Krav Maga I still see the same basic mindset that was instilled in me in my teen years. If someone attacks me on the street, I defend myself and I respond with everything I have.

You can never know your attacker. You won't know if they are on drugs (PCP), if they are psycho, if they are a serial killer etc.

All you need to say if someone asks is that you're not sure what happened, but you were so scared and everything will be fine.

Being attacked on the street is not a mutually consenting action between two individuals as in sport fighting. It's one individual minding their own business being attacked by someone else.

If someone thinks the response is brutal, they are perfectly welcome to step in and take the place of the person who got attacked.
Posted by: tuxette

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 08:07 AM

Let me rephrase what I said then. If you disarm an attacker and take his or her weapon, this does not automatically give you the right to use that weapon against your attacker. In some cases, using that weapon against your attacker could screw you royally in the eyes of the law. But how cases are decided are according to the evidence that comes in, witness statements, CCTV footage if any, etc.

I don't know how an attacker would respond when disarmed. My initial guess is that in most cases, they would try to get away from you.

Has anyone gone through this in real life?
Posted by: Dedicated1

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 10:02 AM

Though I have never been in the situation of being attacked with a weapon outside of training, I would venture this guess. A weapon is the source of power for the attacker, it's what makes them feel in control and gives them a false sence of security. Take that away and they lose everything, they panic.
Posted by: tuxette

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 10:12 AM

Yes, but do they panic and run or panic and attack? Is it more likely to go one way or the other?
Posted by: harlan

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 10:16 AM

I have been in the situation of being attacked with a weapon. My mindset, even though I am new to MA, is that a weapon changes everything. They are a 'threat' only until they move. That is why I study weapons.

I always told my kids, that as far as I am concerned, the minute someone picks up a rock you should consider that they are willing to use it.
Posted by: Dedicated1

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 12:57 PM

I think they would panic and try to regain that power, they would fight to get the weapon back. But that is why you do not try to take the weapon until it is time to do so. Control the weapon and beat them until they drop it.
Posted by: dhatcher

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 05:07 PM

Quote:

Let me rephrase what I said then. If you disarm an attacker and take his or her weapon, this does not automatically give you the right to use that weapon against your attacker. In some cases, using that weapon against your attacker could screw you royally in the eyes of the law. But how cases are decided are according to the evidence that comes in, witness statements, CCTV footage if any, etc.





I would venture to say this. If someone attacks you with a weapon (stick, rock, knife, gun etc.) and you manage to disarm them; if they come after you after being disarmed, you have every right in the world to use that weapon against them. Who knows!? They could have a backup that gives them the confidence to try to get their original weapon back.

If you disarm them and they run away, then I would say leave it at that. Call the cops, file a report and give a description.

The shitty thing about the eyes of the law as it were, is that now that you've studied some Krav Maga, you're considered a "trained killer," which means you have the obligation to protect the person attacking you ... to a degree. Your first obligation is to protect yourself and whoever you're with. And a little further down the ladder, shitty as it is, you have to protect the person attacking you.

But like I said, my judgement call is, if I take someone's weapon away from them and they keep coming... guess what? They're now going to be intimate with that weapons capability. If they stand still or leave, then ok fine.
Posted by: globetrotter

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 01/25/06 06:45 PM

If somebody attackes you with a weapon, you then should do what ever you can to destroy them. it may, or may not, be the best tactic to use their own weapon against them, but in terms of the right, yes, you have the right, untill such time as they try to run away and cease the hostilities. if you think that they are simply trying to gain a little distance to attack you again, you could argue that.
Posted by: PSYOPS

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 03/13/06 06:10 PM

I think that the key phrase to remember here is "reasonable use of force". If a person attacks you with any weapon and you manage to disarm the attacker you have every right to use a reasonable amount of force should that person attack you again.

I would also like to add that the way you articulate your actions is also a key. I would certainly not mention the fact that you have any specialized training. This does increase your liability should a conflict ensue. Just my opinion.
Posted by: Fletch1

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 03/13/06 06:53 PM

Quote:



The [censored] thing about the eyes of the law as it were, is that now that you've studied some Krav Maga, you're considered a "trained killer,"...




Trained Killer? Whaaaaaaaat?????????????
Posted by: Dalen

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 03/13/06 11:26 PM

My Krav experience is from the eighties, and it is not my primary style by any means (PDK is), but I am also someone who has been in a great number of altercations in my life, and experience has taught me that anything goes. It is not just a saying.
When my jaw was broken by a joe six pack I was too young and cocky to take seriously, i ended up with two screws in my jaw for the rest of my life, a $14,000 hospital bill, and six weeks out of work that led to my losing one of the best jobs I'd ever had.
Over twenty years later that nerve is still severed, I can only feel half of my face when I kiss my wife good night, and should I ever have future medical problems because of it, they will be pre-existing and not covered.
I was a black belt(had nearly 12 years in at that point and had done a lot of street fighting), the kid was an idiot...one of many in a long life of fighitng, cooking. bouncing.
Any attack- armed or unarmed can kill you, the attacker's intent has absolutely nothing to do with what effect they might have on you.
A broken hand can mean weeks out of work, a broken leg the same, etc... and a sad reality is that most who will attack you really don't mean you grievous harm, it is simply at the moment that more often than not they don't care.
Put them down, take them out...the faster the better.
Don't call the police unless you must, walk away. Wake up the next day go to work, train, live and love. Whatever happens to an attacker is more than deserved. Personaly at this point in my life I have learned to not even see them as humans.
I may sound sick to some. But I am going to work in the morning, I will wake up next to a loving wife, and I will train and work with others of similar opinion who are not stupid enough to die or be seriously harmed to hold up some societally accept concept of right and wrong.
I wish you the same.
Posted by: littlemikey26

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 03/17/06 01:49 PM

I kind of agree with dalen, my sensei always said if you got into it with someone stop them any way you can then walk away, if you do hurt someone, even if you are in the right, oftentimes the police will just see it as two guys fighting and you will go to jail anyway, not to mention the guy who jumped you may sue. so unles you got seriously hurt just walk away, if you dropped the guy or girl who just attacked you, you do have liability if not legally at least as one human to another to check them first to make sure you didnt do fatal damage even if it means just pulling them off the street and making sure they dont choke on their own vomit, at least then if you do go to jail or court they will take into account that you administered first aid to someone who just attacked you. also the one time i did disarm a guy with a knife he practically dove for the knife, i kicked him in the head, he was so fixated on it he didnt even protect his face! generally on the street they will fight to get the weapon back or they will run.
Posted by: Derik

Re: A question about attacks and response levels - 03/18/06 10:15 PM

Quote:

Ranger,
But taking out a knife means you're trying to kill me and I take offense to that.

Chris




thats great