tallgeese

I'd stay away from the rumor mill of shin conditioning and just stay with constant drilling and sparring. Eventually, you'll become accostmed to the strikes there. We do some warm ups involving kicks to the legs, parrying kicks, ect. that go a long way to getting your body, specifically your legs, used to absorbing trauma. Remember to back off, espically early on, if you get a truely signifigant and painful soft tissue injury or radical bone brusing along the shin. Hobbing around sucking wind for weeks while you attempt to push through will only slow down your over all training progress.

Completely justified, morally and legally. Where I live, deadly force can be used to protect your life or anothers. In this case, the baddie has a gun pointed at the clerk. He's already considered a leathal force threat and thus, force likely to cause "death or great bodily harm" can be applied immediately. Morally, it's simply an extension of self defense.

Only against a downed opponant. It's too risky for me to have a foot off the ground that long against a mobile bad guy. Now if you've put him down via takedown or stike already, it's pretty good for dropping in damage prior to engaging on the ground or for strking while remaining standing. When thrown this way, I don't have to get my leg off the ground all that far to get drop .

Well, I can't speak for others on this forum as to their profession, although I'd guess a couple of others were law enforcement of some type as well, but I'm an active LEO. As to the training received on this topic, yes, law enforcement does receive training in weapon retention and disarming. Here's the thing, most of this has been done before in one form or another. I can't count the number of different DT programs I've seen and most use some variant of the same control priciples, a vast majorty are derivitives of some martail art. Some utilize these movements better than others. The acadamy weapon disarming I learned was far inferior to things that I had been exposed to during the course of my MA training. The current program that my dept. uses had disarming that is pretty good (even I I don't care for the rest of the program). Basically, it all comes down to controlling distance and weapon. After that, you need to consider escalating to a more efficient weapon. Don't get me wrong, this is just a big strategy brush I'm working with here, the more specific tactics that are used to accomplish these principles are certainly more numerous. As I think bushido man pointed out in anothre thread, firearms training can almost be considered an art form in and of itself. He's right, it certanly could be considered such. I'm a cross-training advocate however, and think that integrating this type of training into a martial arts program can be very useful. The key is to training in efficient and realistic movements, as is the concept of treating such training as a "last restort" methodology. It needs to be stressed that this is a negitive situation and should not be attempted under normal circumstances. Cross training that considers defense against, or even a step further, training with guns, does itself a great service in regards to preparing students for today's enviornment. Qualified instruction is key if you want to go this route and there are plenty of groups out there doing lots of good stuff with firearm defense, alot of the Krav schools come to mind as do some of the JKD places I've seen.

We tend to kick at the groin quite a bit. Stance is a great place to start, I go with cross here, bladed to about 45 degrees. I turn my lead foot in just a hair (almost like a slightly wider seanchin sp? stance), then when I lift the fron leg in response. This allows the knee and shin to cover teh approach to the groin quickly and efficiently.

Hair pull to destabalize, sprawl to faceplant using the hair as a guide. Ear rips, often as a follow up to eye gouges. Sets up neck cranks well. Biting, anywhere.

Taylor, I agree with your point about the meditative aspects of training being essintial in the fact that one needs to be as relaxed as poissible during conflict. It's a good point and I think, as you do, that this is probibly more important that technical ability alone. However, I think our methods for this differ. I'm not certain that either of us is right or wrong, but certainly we see two differnt paths to this goal. I think that the optimal state of performance during a fight, that a degree of controlled emotion is needed for can indeed be trained for. Instead of doing kata for this however, I think that the use of sparring and sparring type self defense drills is much more practical. It places you in a facsimile of the situation for which your training. It is fluid and ever changing, making you compenstate by applying your skills in a spontanious enviornment. Additionally, you are preparing for combat by acclimitizing your body and mind to a state of heightened violence, something that kata cannot do. I agree as well that in the older, more authentic forms, there are probibly lessons to be learned that were not passed down just waiting to be discovered. My point is that human physiology hasn't changed that much since fuedal Japan, if the movement was functional then it probibly still is now and since we are an industrious and violent species, we've probilily found out how to do it all over again. It's the time spent uncovering it that I see as less than optimal. That is time that could be spent repping a proven movement over and over again to make it that much more functional for you. Again, I think we agree on quite a bit. It's just interesting to note and debate the differences in the paths we're taking to try and find the same place.

I've got to vote in the no catagory here. Cross made the point ealier that any movement drill is better than nothing (something to that effect, sorry if that's not entirely accurate). I have to disagree here. If a movment drill is engraining poor habits, then it's worth should be suspect. The case I always point to is the long stances and the hands chambered at the waist. It's poor body mechanics for a real fight. Continually pressing your body into that muscle memeory will ensure that you're only making the situation worse in a fight. Here's the thing, we don't need to hide these movments anymore as my understaning of why kata was developed goes. Not to mention that the vast amount of forms done today have no ancient origin but are only a few decades old in their current state of evolution. Warfare evolves. Training for warfare evolves. Continual experimenation is key to continued growth and too many times that's what kata is preventing. I'm not saying that they're aren't schools and arts that to both, there's plenty. I'm just saying that time spent on kata is time that could be spent on sparring, drilling on mitts or bags, one steps if they're your thing, or any number of other trianing tools that present more tangable results. Just my thoughts, no disrespect intended.

Try to sprawl first and foremost, espically if you're more comfortable on your feet. Sprawl, counter repet as needed. If you pull to the ground, get used to pulling to the guard. If he's going to take you down, at least try to gain a decent position out of it. Pull to guard and immediatley, and I mean like RIGHT NOW, begin attacking. Don't let him concentrate on trying to escape your guard. Continually press the attack in combination.

I was just wondering what everyone had on their list of "required" reading in referance to the arts. Mine would include, at the top of the list: The Tao of Jeet Kune Do Living the Martial Way- Forrest Morgan The next couple will probibly surprise people coming from me, but also: Karate-do, My Way of Life- Funikoshi Secrets of the Samurai- Ratti and company Code of the Samurai- trans. by Cleary Not really martial arts related, but important none the less: On Killing and/or On Combat - Grossman A couple of these are actually required reading for black belt level candidates, I'm considering mandating a couple of more for my guys. What else do you guys consider "essintial reading"?

Above posters were correct, the police device that most people assciate with the tonfa is the PR-24. I don't know how they earned the designation. I've seen them in varying lengths and even collapsable models. They've largely gone out of vouge these days due to the increased training time needed to learn to use them and employ the specialized joint manipulations that they are designed for. I think, from a law enforcment stand point, this is a good thing. I come out of a joint locking art, and I don't even know how to use one of the things. A cop with 40 hours of unarmed training in acadamy plus a week or so of refresher every year shouldnt be expected to have enough reps to effectively use it either. Most places have gone to the expandable baton, like the Asp or Modonauk model. It's way easier to teach a straight club to someone at a basic level than more exotic weaponry.

Thanks guys. Bushido man, as usual, I agree with you. If you want to think of it in those terms, working with firearms could almost be considered an art. As far as what we mandate in training it is relitively basic. Guys have taken NRA basic classes to fulfill the requirement, one took a college course in firearms called rifle/pistol (yeah, don't see that often). I've given instruction in it as well to meet the requirement. Most of it is safety/care related. However, range time is expected as well as the ability to hit a target from a CQB distance (use a lot of basic marksmanship things). Reloading and malfunction drills should be understood as well, at l east in a basic sense. I use a ball and dummy drill with a tap,rack, ready response. I don't delve into tactics too much, unless one of the guys has a real intrest in it. Mainly we make them understand cover vs. concealment on that front. To be clear, it's not like we spend tons of time on this aspect. But I think that an art purported to be for self defense in the day and age can't ignore the firearm as a potental tool.

Agreed about the "grab and stab" being much more comon than slashers. I think, but don't know, that this would bear out statistically if one took the time to look at ER data. As for the original post...wow, that's a crappy place to end up. Talk about a negitive. Ignoring for a second the very valid question of how one would let this situation develop, I'd say clear out and esclate weapons or barring any weapons to escalate to, just bug out. I agree that when stuck at a bad range crashing the gap to neutrilze the weapon is a good tactic and works much better than trying to maintain a set range with a knifer. However, I think that crashing against two weapons is a bit much to ask. I cerainly think that attempting any sort of takedown here is as good a suicide. Rather than maintain distance, gain distance. Get out, put whatever you can in the way and clear as far away from this guy as you can. Then go back and spend some more time working on situational awareness. Yeah, it sounds kinda lame, but barring putting rounds on this dude getting away from him is the safest bet.

I voted folder, because that's the style of knife I have on my person most of the time. Occasionally, I'll have a small fixed blade as well. I use the Smith and Wesson Blackops. It's a great little knife that has an assistined open feature that lets you deploy it very quickly.

Knife, club (hanbo) primarily. All blackbelts in the art I study must be proficient with a handgun as well. Part of the test is a Q&A and practical conering care, cleaning, and deplyment of a firearm.

Something practical. Knife and/or club (like a hanbo or escraima style).

Assuming that you're proficient with both, it's got to be the gun. It can be conceiled pretty easily if you dress around it and can be presented relitively quickly with practice. It has range and a track record of ending fights. Yes, training in all sorts of things as well as integration of those skills is important. Given the choice between the two, it's a firearm all the way.

Again, assuming that your force was legally justified... I agree with bushido man, you have a legal and moral obligation to report the incident. You may, depending on the creativity of the officer and your reluctance to speak wiht them, get charged with obstruction of some sort (justidicionts and state law permitting). Ceratinly you need to seek medical services for the individual. A retreat to a safe enviornment is fine, but leveing the scene is a bad idea. If you get tracked down later it predesposes law enforcement to consider your account of the incident as suspect. It makes you look guilty. An unfair perception, maybe, but it doesen't make it the fact that it happens less true. LEt's face it, giving a guy a beat down, however justified, and then leaivng the scene with out telling the cops, is a bit shady in most reasonable people's eyes. As for the rest of the "after" part. Start preparing your statement the second the incident is over. Stick to the facts and how the individual brought this down on himself. Don't lie, or cover things up, even if you think they sound bad. If you were getting ready to get shanked and you punched the guy in the troat and actually did searous damage, don't say it happend while you were "wrestilng over the knife". Sure enough, some witness will have the actual version and it will not jive with yours. Again, this sends a red flag up. Be able to articulate why you punched him in the throat (for example's sake) and why that level of force was needed. It's way better to go that route than trying to spin things to a better light. Good topic.

Excellent post! I agree with everything that has been said above. I'd add that one factor that many people don't take into account is mindset. This is almost a bigger factor that skill in some cases. The fact is, a violent individual intent on doing you harm has already set his m ind on a course of action and is not restrained by feelings of compassion or worry of legalities. Too many martail artist, while excellet technicians, don't train thier mind set to be that of a warrior. Real violence therefore frightens them and makes them less effective. Mindset training is, to me, at least as important as skill building and often overlooked.

Most states work under a resonableness clause. In other words, were your actions reasonable to another person, with similar training and experiances given the situation. Most even give you the benifit of the doubt and only the count the facts as you know them at the time of the incident. So, a dude with a realistic bb gun breaks into your home and points his pea shooter at you. It looks real to you, you fire your own weapon, which is of the .45 variety and kill him. Only later do you learn that he was pointing a bb gun at you. Your standard of reasonableness can only be considered from your point of view at the time. In otherwords, a real-looking gun pointed in your direction. So what' s reasonable in a MA self-defense scenario? If a guy threatens you at knife point and wants your wallet and you give it to him and he subsequently leaves, then it's not reasonable to run after him and beat him to a pulp with your collapsable baton from Asian World. However, let's say he goes to stab you and you then beat him to the same pulp, now it's a reasonable action. You were in fear for your life. It's important to note that you'll need to deesclate as well. Just because you start h itting the knife weilder from above with you baton, doesn't mean that you can continue when he fall to the ground, drops the knife and starts holding his bleeding head. To continue strinking him now is clearly unreasonable and now you're looking at charges. On the subject of charges, keep in mind that a couple of post from ealier are lumping criminal and civil liability together. Monatary damages for lost wages, hospital bills, ect. are civil in nature. Criminal charges would include any thing like assult, battery, disorderly, ect. It's very possible to be cleared criminally and still face a civil judgment (which sounds like might have been the case with the individual who broke an attackers hand taking the knife away).

With respect, stout... Of course every Christian has to weigh his or her actions against their beleif system. It's that system that defines our faith. You can't take it out of the equation when it is suddenly inconvienant for the situation. It's that kind of outlook that should permeate the life of every beleiver (still working on it myself). So how do we address the application of those values in a sudden situation? We deal with those questions before they arise, thus removing the doubt from our actions ahead of time. Then, you can react on your programming and not your inner turmoil. It all needs to be resovled ahead of time. As far as what people are teach and what they choose to learn, BBof C or anyone else practicing should practice whatever and however they choose. I think that those practices should be given a long and hard look as to their actual productivity is the situations that you are asking them to function in. But that's really another topic altogether. And finally to the strikes used by smaller or weaker people to cause instant death....few and far between. As said ealier, much harder to do that to talk about. Even a good eye gouge, one of my personal favorites, comes no guarentee of success or victory on your part. Should these types of strikes be taught? Absoultly, I won't promote someone past white belt who dosen't have an understanding of eye gouging, but relying on them to even all odds is overly hopeful at best. As for my personal stance, and that's all it is, I follow the "thou shall not murder" school of thought. For me, studying MA's is about learning to fight, to defend one's self, to survive violence. To do that, you have to consider training movements that may heavily injur or kill another person. Remember, even though the word "artist" was used in the title of the thread, there is a "martial" side to that as well. At it's heart, it's about interpersonal combat.

I'm going to shamelessly plug the fitness program I use. Check out crossfit.com It's a pretty good site that encorprotes olympic lifing, cardio, and bodyweight trining to acheive results. They are pretty fanatical so take the gnashing of teeth with a grain of salt but the program is solid. It's contiunally changeing up to shock the body. If you've already seen it I apoligive for trying to send you there. If you haven't check it out. It's not real mass based and focuses on functional strenght, which we as MA'ers need more than a bench. That being said, I ususally spend two to three days a week doing a short bodybuilding style workout as well. It's set up for five days a week of work. You might like it.

I've got no scientific backing for this but personally, if and when I have to split my sleep cycle (midnight shifter) my energy level is about zero for my next activity period. I am always able to function better with a sleep pattern that is not broken by other waking activity.

Not only can it lead to injury as was pointed out above, but it can lead to bad movements as well. If you're tired, your form will start to suffer. If you do enough repititons with bad form, you will start to engrain that motion into your head. Pretty soon, even when you're fresh, your punches and kicks will start to suffer. Techniques (man I hate that word) before exhaustion. Work fine or complex motor skills prior to gross ones. Punching being more complex while pushing weight would be more of a gross motor function.

Toss in some rings to the above ideas as well. You can hang them adjustably so you can do pullups, dips, push-ups ect. They really work you. Additionally, you can hang them at alternaing heights for all the above exercises for variation. Consider if you have a place to hang a rope as well. Rope climbing really is a great body wieght workout.