The Truth About Self-Defense?

[Carcano]

True or False???

http://www.attackproof.com/

1. It doesn't matter whether you know one technique or a thousand
YOU CAN NEVER PREDICT EXACTLY HOW YOU'LL BE ATTACKED.

2. Ask any cop or soldier who's seen real mayhem: once the spit hits the fan,
all pre-planned counters go right out the window.

3. If you've been programmed by training a specific response to a specific
attack, your self-defense will FAIL if the attack changes by even one inch from the way you've trained. Your unrehearsed response will be your only
response.

4. An attack in progress can CHANGE in an instant...and keep on changing
until you're dead.

5. Believing that One "Magic" Technique will work against a hundred different attacks is a suicidal myth. IT IS FAR BETTER TO DEVELOP THE ABILITY TO IMPROVISE ANY STRIKE FROM ANY POSITION SPONTANEOUSLY WITH POWER, ACCURACY AND BALANCE THAN TO RELY ON CHOREOGRAPHED TECHNIQUES.

6. Real self-defense is about IMPROVISATION, SURVIVAL and ESCAPE and not fancy acrobatic dueling or sport fighting in the Ring.

7. Real self-defense recognizes that trying to grapple or otherwise CONTROL the enemy exposes you to more danger each additional second you're connected to him.

8. Real self-defense requires training to deal with the reality of MULTIPLE ASSAILANTS--because if you're focused on grappling on the ground with only one attacker, his buddies will have an easier time kicking your head in.

9. Real self-defense should work even if you're NOT an Olympic athlete.

10. Real violence is ugly, unpredictable and CHAOTIC by nature. Your attacker obeys no rules and neither should you.

 

[draqon]

This world is about probability of success increasing or decreasing as a result of applicable knowledge and experience gain. It never was about guarantees, nothing is, except death, which is a guarantee.

And taxes.

 

[fedr808]

Id have to disagree with the OP, self defense is extremely useful.

It's like saying I can beat the crap out of a green beret, I couldnt, he has superior self defense to me.

Techniques are for practice, not for actual use in life.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

I would agree with the OP to a certain extent in that one type of training can be over come under the right given responses. I am not a trained fighter I could never find anyone willing to train me for what I required. I am a self taught Street Fighter or rather I was when I was many years younger than I am now. Now I am just a fat old man with stories of yester year. But one thing I have found that most defensive technics do not take into account and that is the mental state of mind of the Attacker if the attacker has in there head they are going to rip out your throat and shove it up your ass and have the physical striagthen to to do and the mental mind set to do they will. Most fights come down to how is crazier then whom and how far are you will to go to win a fight or fend off an attack.

 

[Carcano]

Techniques are for practice, not for actual use in life.

You dont believe techniques are practiced for actual use???

 

[krazedkat]

1. Yes you can predict how you'll be attacked. I've done it multiple times.

2. That's why you have to be able to make things up on the spot... -.-

3. Incorrect. Once you've practiced one way you can adjust easily.

4. Hmmm.. True but you have to adjust as well...

5. So true...

6. Yes, you are right.

7. Unless you put him in a position which renders his attacks useless.

8. So true.

9. Yes, however it can be helpful to be one...

10. True. They attack you, you kill them if you can...

Experience: Multiple years of Tae-Kwon-Do

 

[mugaliens]

Id have to disagree with the OP, self defense is extremely useful.

It's like saying I can beat the crap out of a green beret, I couldnt, he has superior self defense to me.

Techniques are for practice, not for actual use in life.

I think the point of the linked website is to prepare one's self for actual use, not practice.

 

[jpappl]

8. Real self-defense requires training to deal with the reality of MULTIPLE ASSAILANTS--because if you're focused on grappling on the ground with only one attacker, his buddies will have an easier time kicking your head in.

The best defense to this is to outrun them all.

For the most part, 3 or 4 men will take down any guy and beat the crap out of him.

 

[Doreen]

True or False???

http://www.attackproof.com/

1. It doesn't matter whether you know one technique or a thousand
YOU CAN NEVER PREDICT EXACTLY HOW YOU'LL BE ATTACKED.

True.

2. Ask any cop or soldier who's seen real mayhem: once the spit hits the fan,
all pre-planned counters go right out the window.

To some degree. But in a one on one encounter training will help, period.

3. If you've been programmed by training a specific response to a specific
attack, your self-defense will FAIL if the attack changes by even one inch from the way you've trained. Your unrehearsed response will be your only
response.

False. One inch. No. That's like saying that someone trained to catch footballs will drop one thrown with a slightly different arc. Nah. Training gets us used to patterns and exceptions. And within that range. If Federer faces a 7 foot opponent, he will still be a formidable opponent and probably win. His body will adjust, and fast.

4. An attack in progress can CHANGE in an instant...and keep on changing
until you're dead.

Sure.

5. Believing that One "Magic" Technique will work against a hundred different attacks is a suicidal myth. IT IS FAR BETTER TO DEVELOP THE ABILITY TO IMPROVISE ANY STRIKE FROM ANY POSITION SPONTANEOUSLY WITH POWER, ACCURACY AND BALANCE THAN TO RELY ON CHOREOGRAPHED TECHNIQUES.

First you learn choreographed responses, slowly your body learns to improvise on these.

6. Real self-defense is about IMPROVISATION, SURVIVAL and ESCAPE and not fancy acrobatic dueling or sport fighting in the Ring.

The wording is manipulative. It doesn't have to be fancy acrobatic dueling. It can be a range of blunt, generally effective tactics. And that is a HUGE improvement for most people and will protect them much better than their improvised instincts against most muggers, for example.

7. Real self-defense recognizes that trying to grapple or otherwise CONTROL the enemy exposes you to more danger each additional second you're connected to him.

Sure, running away is safest, if it is. If you are faster. However having your back to your opponent, especially if they have a baseball bat and are a better sprinter makes evasion a poor choice.

8. Real self-defense requires training to deal with the reality of MULTIPLE ASSAILANTS--because if you're focused on grappling on the ground with only one attacker, his buddies will have an easier time kicking your head in.

Again, making it seem like there is one answer for everyone. Someone taking a self-defense class for a year wednesday nights is getting some serious value if they can fend off one person who is bigger than them once. This is a very manipulative list.

9. Real self-defense should work even if you're NOT an Olympic athlete.

Yes, you should improve your chances regardless.

10. Real violence is ugly, unpredictable and CHAOTIC by nature. Your attacker obeys no rules and neither should you.

I will not assure the other guy is going to gouge out my eyes or bite my nose off in every encounter. Some drunk guy in a bar who throws a punch at me, I will probably not stick my thumbs in his eyes, even if he swing causes him to fall onto me and my chair and I am on my back on the ground with good access to his eyes and no room to punch and concerned about wrestling him because he is bigger.

That's me. This guy makes it sound like we should treat any situation like we are fighting a serial killer. I don't want a lot of people taking his classes.

 

[mike47]

You can not predict a sniper or a random drive by shooting .

 

[thinking]

the truth about self-defense is about ability , mind set , and experience

read the bio's on Bruce Lee and Steven Segal

 

[kmguru]

Self-Defense for physical security or financial security or even emotional security is needed for survival. Period.

 

[sifreak21]

1. Yes you can predict how you'll be attacked. I've done it multiple times.

2. That's why you have to be able to make things up on the spot... -.-

3. Incorrect. Once you've practiced one way you can adjust easily.

4. Hmmm.. True but you have to adjust as well...

5. So true...

6. Yes, you are right.

7. Unless you put him in a position which renders his attacks useless.

8. So true.

9. Yes, however it can be helpful to be one...

10. True. They attack you, you kill them if you can...

Experience: Multiple years of Tae-Kwon-Do

1. no you cant always if you get blindsided or coldcocked hard enough you wont see it comming therefor cant react

10. you kill them you go to jail end of story. unless he has a gun or u can prove without a doubt that if you didnt kill him he would kill you,, you will go to the big house.

if you are a black belt in any martial art or are a professional fighter and you are the assaulter ever you can be charged with assault with a deadly weapon or even attempted murder in sever situations..

if you use you black belt if you have one on someone even in self defense and severly hurt them its still assault on your part. the law will look at it as you are a master in this martial art you would have subdued him without great injury

 

[S.A.M.]

I know of a girl who was a health freak, young, vibrant, ate all the right things, exercised, kept herself fit, ran every single day, learned self defense. One day she was jogging early morning and a drunk driver lost control, went off the street and hit her, killing her instantly.

There is only so much you can control in your life.

 

[sifreak21]

I know of a girl who was a health freak, young, vibrant, ate all the right things, exercised, kept herself fit, ran every single day, learned self defense. One day she was jogging early morning and a drunk driver lost control, went off the street and hit her, killing her instantly.

There is only so much you can control in your life.

100% agreed yet teh goverment is throwing people in jail for weed.. yet how many incidences like this happen with drunk driving.. i personally have yet to see "person killed by high driver"

 

[visceral_instinct]

if you use you black belt if you have one on someone even in self defense and severly hurt them its still assault on your part. the law will look at it as you are a master in this martial art you would have subdued him without great injury

Bullshit.

Skill only goes so far. If you're a small female and your enemy is a 6ft and 200lb male, even if you are a skilled fighter he's still far more dangerous than you.

Even if they are your size it's not your job to subdue them without injury. He or she chose to assault you, it's their own fault.

 

[sifreak21]

Bullshit.

Skill only goes so far. If you're a small female and your enemy is a 6ft and 200lb male, even if you are a skilled fighter he's still far more dangerous than you.

Even if they are your size it's not your job to subdue them without injury. He or she chose to assault you, it's their own fault.

you obviously know nothing about martial arts.. i want to see you take on a woman that has a blackbelt in anything.. and if you read my post i was talking about killing in my example IE someone attacks you and you kill them.. or someone attacks you and you break more than 1 bone like a leg and an arm ur in the wrong. heres a link to a dojo defence attourny

http://www.ittendojo.org/articles/general-4.htm

he also states use of deadly forcue is not acceptable unless you conclude that the assalent intended on inflicting sever dmg to you.. even then if you are a 250 pound male and the agressor is a 95 pound male use of deadly force isnt applicable unless the assaliant again has a weapon

 

[fedr808]

You dont believe techniques are practiced for actual use???

In Tai Kwan do you practiced techniques, usually involving about 30+ steps, the idea being that the techniques would teach you elements of fighting.

 

[visceral_instinct]

you obviously know nothing about martial arts.. i want to see you take on a woman that has a blackbelt in anything.. and if you read my post i was talking about killing in my example IE someone attacks you and you kill them.. or someone attacks you and you break more than 1 bone like a leg and an arm ur in the wrong. heres a link to a dojo defence attourny

http://www.ittendojo.org/articles/general-4.htm

he also states use of deadly forcue is not acceptable unless you conclude that the assalent intended on inflicting sever dmg to you.. even then if you are a 250 pound male and the agressor is a 95 pound male use of deadly force isnt applicable unless the assaliant again has a weapon

Actually, I've been doing various martial arts since age 13.

Did you bother reading this part:

The defendant’s (and the assailant’s) physical characteristics and past history will be taken into account, but mental condition is of no concern. Thus, comparative size, weight, strength, handicap or pre-existing injury may support a reasonableness finding, but unusual sensitivity or fear will not.

Ie, if they are 3 times your own size and able to snap your neck in two, it's reasonable to do them an injury when fighting back, or so I can see anyway.

 

[sifreak21]

yes i did read taht part did you read my post? when i said only when its right and just and you think your life is in danger