JerryLove

There are a great deal of strikes (and all grapples) which do not appear in boxing. The ability to bob and weve is an excellent one. The ingraned trait to rely on it may backfire.

Put a knife in your hand and try again

I like the use of the knuckles as they will hurt most anything in the region... nothing like a good guntang.

You seem to continue to make the topic about you and your qualificatoins rather than your actual advice . I'm sorry that you feel singled out, and I'm sure everyone here apprriciates your sincere advice. But no amount of complaining about your treatment is going to cause a change of people's opinion... that is accomplished in a discussion through explanation and support of a position. I am a little unclear on how "I never carried anything on the door" and "I [...] came out on top with out the use of the knife in my pocket". Are you relating to a large number of people who attacked you with knives when you were not working a door, or do you not consider the knife in your pocket "anything"? I am, of course, familiar with Geoff Thompson, and have a collection of articles from him. As of yet, I have not started adding his books/tapes to my collection (poverty, and IRL study taes priority), but I'm happy to look it up. This is not a fair characterization of all clubs and their bouncers.

Nor is a blade the best method of non-lethally subduing a drunk. Conversely, in most of the US, it's far easier to defend the use of deadly force than "malicious wounding" (which is what deliberatly slicing a ligament and permenantly crippling someone is generally deemed). It's not enough for whom? What constitutes "enough"? Wouldn't the depends on the goal of the person learning? How many soldiers learning to fire a rifle learn "the human body, inside and out"? Have they, therefore, not learned "enough"? Other than the above mentioned legal issue? I like tendons... though a great number are right next to arteries. I'm not sure I consider permenant, crippling wounds a kinder act. I would think "kinfe fighting" and "dangerous" were pretty synonymous. Always a danger of text. For example, right now I have this image of a 20-year bouncer pulling knives on drunks (a tone you've set for me in this post). Though it would be incorrect to say I was offended... more like worried. Whenever someone takes the use of a weapon as anything other than deadly serious... when they seem to rationalize tendon severing as "he gets to go home"... I'm worried. But perhaps you do come across to me differently in text.

Same thing I've always done in similar events. I leave immediately.

Let me make sure I have this straight... you are advocating pulling out a knife and then "stabbing to wound"? I'd suggest you stop carrying one, your approach is irresponsable, dangerous, and ultimately foolish. If my knife is in play, I've probably already decided to use it (I don't threaten with it) and I am trying to remove you as a threat to me (I know of no better way to do that than to kill you). I'm interested in (and have trained for) the fastest and most debilitaing locations I can manage, as well as the most accessable. Though technically speaking, my fondness for a slash to the eyeball is not fatal. I've never interacted with Frank Cucci or a student of his, though my experience with "Ex SEAL martial arts" has been uniformly poor. It amazes me how much people seem to equate "SEAL" with "highly detailed and sophisticated CQB skills". Seals are "force multipliers". They have specialties (demolitions, language, sniper), plus a huge brace of "basic" skills (from infiltration of local groups to training methodologies), plus all the basic needs (infantry fighting), plus all the "Land and Sea" stuff. While I have no doubt that they are compitent fighters (hrm: large, strong, contidioned, aggressive soldiers), I'm entirely unaware that they get (or any reason why they should) terribly sophisticated unarmed nd melee-weapon fighting training. In fact, living in Tampa, McDill AFB houses USSOCOM (http://www.armyrotc.ufl.edu/resources/branches/specialforces.htm). With the school only about 5 miles from the AFB, we run into (and often train) SO people all the time.

The "SAS" books I've seen are very poor, and therefore not a good source of material.

This is a horribly off-topic and inappropriate post which has no place here. On top of that, it's incorrect (2 posts ago on this thread I was agreeing with Delta). On top of *that* it ignores the fact that "me too" is a useless post. Why would I want to chime in to post "what he said"? Of course I tend to post when I disagree... at least posts that are in response to statements. And that's the limit of how much I'm gonna discuss my postiing habits on this thread. If you have issue with what I've actually posted, I invidte you to argue it.

I have some little pocket-book thing that's supposed to be in that line (I'll see if I can track down where I put it) and it's horrible. That's an exaggeration.

I must disagree. I don't see that opening a line of communication at that point is useful. Conversely, if you had a firearm pointed at me and I desired to attack you anyway, *then* I would be looking to open up a discussion... to distract you from the task at hand. No, from a civillian standpoint, I tend to think in the "stay back and don't move or I will shoot you" is about the most "discussion" I"m interested in having. There is a city in Georga which passed a law requiring all homeowners to posess a firearm. There is not a "culture of fear there" (they actually did it in protest to an Arizona city which outlawed firearms), but there was a *drastic* drop in crime after the law went into effect. I go to a martial arts school where essentially everyone is armed, and about half carry fireamrs. There is no "culture of fear" there either. But you've not given reasons as to why. Under what circumstances? I'm gonna go with Delta1 here. Certainly this is not what hunters do (what I would imagine you would learn on a rifle range).

Agree completely. You must be ready and willing to use the weapon... but that does not mean you need to actually do so just because it's out.

No, but the "level of force" rules are very different with a firearm than unarmed. Are you aware of police ever using a firearm for the purpose of subdual? My apologies... not my intent. Yes, but I have touch references for that. I've said before... "the fight isn't over till the twitching stops". I think that you are touching on a very common misconception that many people have that "fatal" = "immediately fatal". No matter what else, you need to be prepared to deal with the attacker attacking... even after you've killed him. (and I believe we are in the same boat here).

I'm pretty sure that "aiming to wound" is not a legally defensable shot... but I defer to a lawyer. Seems good advice for a sniper, but not for someone in a fight. Again, I'll defer if someone can actually cite, but I don't believe that such precise aim is realistically achievable for most people most of the time (in a fight). Hence the "center of mass" argument. If we could accurately target so closely (which way is gravity moving their organs right this moment?) why not just got for the spine shot every time? A heart hit is not instant death either. Depends on the angle of incident doesn't it?

Generally speaking, you must shoot to kill. If you are not in sufficient danger to kill them, then you are not in sufficient danger to shoot them at all. The classic pattern is "two in the chest, one in the head", but I tend to lean torwads the use of shots to the pelvic girdle. Heads can be hard to iht, but severe damage to the hips and pelvis will remove mobility (prevent them from getting to you). Depeding on ammunition supplies (I do need to track dowm more pre-ban clips for the Ruger) I'd put a miniumum nuber of rounds at 3. If I've got a good capacity and don't expect other assailents, probibly more like 5-6... my level of fear (for example, wheather he is close or continuing to close) will play in to the decision as well.

I've done several of the habbud drills, it's still farther than I would choose to be against an armed attacker. Particularly the former sounds much like fencing. If that is an option, I'll take it regardless... BTW, at what point in the fight to you get to determine if they are a master with a blade or "some guy with a knife"?

Saying "Harimau" in Silat is like saying "monkey" in Kung-fu... there's a lot that qualifies. I'm not aware that I have. Could you cite where I said that arts with SE Asian cluture have less to offer? Yes, you like "practically" body contact. I like quite literally body contact. My chest is something I hit and manipulate with.

Nope, you're good. That's pretty much my issue... The FMA I've seen or learned tended to like to stay out and manipulate (they sometimes even count off "1...2...3") and ran into trouble with the person that just pressed in.

Generally "on first contact"... in short "very early" I don't agree with your ascertation that you will definately know if your opponent has a blade. Nor do I agree with your (emperically disprovable) claim that "you're done" if he does. Both of those things said, I was referring offensively. With a dark, sharp knife; it is quite possable for me to be cutting you repeatedly ina fight without you realizing that I am armed. This situation works well for me as it causes you to fail to focus on and control the knife, as well as allowing you to "pace yourself for the fight", not realizing that you are bleeding. Again I must disagree. I don't "get in fights". If there is a confrontation it is because, despite my best efforts, one has been forced. At the point that I'm convinced I am in danger, and assuming range permits, drawing my firearm would be my *first* combative response. I would be a great fool, armed with a handgun, to willingly get into a wrestling match with it holstered.

Closer than what? I've seen Mande Muda, and I do not study it. I've seen Senai Gayong from its top instructors (Chiku and Soliman), and I do not study it. I'm not picking on either style, but my opinion was that they were less effective than the ones that I have chosen to study. Mileage may vary. I cannot comment on a comparison between WC and the two Silat styles you identified... speaking for my own style, my opinion has alreday been expressed... but I will say that my preferred fighting range (body contact range) is closer than that of most WC people (between punching and elbow).

If you have not already, I'd recommend taking a look at some tof the Silat styles. I cannot speak for all styles (indeed, the numer I know of well is small), but there is a lot of similarity to the FMA knifework while avoiding the tendancy to fence that I see as (speaking in generalities) FMAs biggest assumption.

I don't always agree. Dark knives are nice because, if you know how, you can keep your opponent's energy low and defenses insufficient by not letting him realize you have a knife and he is being cut. OTOH, shiny knives can both make someone nervous (and nervous people are less analytical), and can make them over-focused o nthe knife... It is your best tool, but if they are willing to chase around after it, that's very exploitable. There are many violent encounters that end because of the presence of a fiream... you need to be ready to use it and recognize when to, but you can win by fear.

I assume you mean the Applegate-Fairbrian knife work. Not a bad choice if you can find it. I've watched 3 Kenpo instructors teach knife work; all three taught Escrima as their knife class. Unfortunately, there is a fundamental and exploitable flaw in the process, but it's "better than most". Always a good skill, but considering the comparitive ease of learning offensive knife use (and considering tha twas his request), I must disagree. Depends on your opponents response. The reverse grip can be very effective (statistically speaking, more deadly... but I think that comes from attackers without skills and goals), and there is noting wrong with the #1, #2, and #7 angles. Depending on your opponent's response, you can fellet their defending hand or simply fish around into another angle. otherwise, I generally agree with you both

Are we more concerned with arguing the mechanisms actually involved? Or determining wheather there are hits that will kill you for other than obvious reasons (like how acupuncture helps you for other than obvious reasons). If the former, I've got ideas but don't feel like wading in... for the latter, I would be surprised if this is not the case. I've put in (and have had put in) hits that "left an impact" which then needed to be "fixed".

Find an instructor with the appropriate skills. In MA, for knife work, my first thought would be IMA (Silat) with the FMA arts and some esoteric European arts second on my list. Living in Berkeley, I don't think you will lack one of those options. I have enough personal exposure to my Silat (which I do not believe has a representitive there) and that of the three DeThaours brothers (Bill, Paul and Victor) that I would recommend them. If you get desperate, I can point you at video material... what you get from it will depend a lot on you.