Would you use them? Do you think they are a valid self defense strategy?

Yes to both if the situation called for it. I've no problem with striking first and I know that as long as the threat of danger is immediate and real in this country (the UK) a preemptive strike is definitely legal.

"There is no first attack in Karate"

That doesn't mean you can't make contact first. An attack can be many things and even if the person throws a strike and you are faster, you strike first.

If an aggressor indicates an intent to harm me, whether through verbal or non-verbal means, then yes. Self-defense.

A valid strategy? Absolutely.

Would I use it myself? No, almost never.

You can be 99 % sure someone is going to attack you and then...nothing. I've seen it quite often and have also been there, right up in someones face screaming and shouting, threatening allsorts and then it all sort of just peters out with no actual violence. If I had struck pre-emptively I would have been in twice the number of fights I have.

Never give a sucker an even break. If they're threatening in any way if they attempt to get up in your face. Hit em hard fast and repeatedly until the threat is no more. Don’t allow them to close distance with you; if they can touch you they can hit you. If they’re in your face, chances are you won’t see the punch, blade or bottle until your tagged then it’s to late. Don’t take chances, the other guy is always faster and knows more than you do. Sucker punching has its place.

If they want ot attack me, they agree to accept the injuries they will sustain.
It's them or me getting beaten. May as well be them, they'll hopefully learn a lesson.

Quote:

---

If they want ot attack me, they agree to accept the injuries they will sustain.

---

How do manage to get them to accept that? Do you force them to sign some sort of waiver or something? "I hereby agree to let you whup my butt and fully accept sole liability for any injuries sustained during said whupping!". What a cool idea... could you send me a copy of the waiver!

Thanks For starting this Matt.

It really shows the theorists from the realists.

McSensei, you just started door work, yes? I really admire your pure intent “Would I use it myself? No, almost never.” I do so wish it was a simple as that principle.

Don’t ever WANT to have to pre-empt, but sometimes it just is the only way. After you have had a few of those violent encounters you seem to so crave, I wonder if you will change your opinion, or indeed with your stated principle, if you are still able to work as a door supervisor

Brain, great point “If someone gets in your range aggresively they have provoked the attack.”

English Law:-
• Common Assault, contrary to section 39 Criminal Justice Act
i. An offence of common assault is committed when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery.
ii. An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force
iii. A battery is committed when a person intentionally and recklessly applies unlawful force to another

'Reasonable Force'
A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of:
• self-defence; or
• defence of another; or
• defence of property; or
• prevention of crime; or
• lawful arrest.

“ I felt in fear of my safety, and had to strike my aggressor 1st as I believed I was about to be attacked”

Mark