Hitting the throath as selfdefense?

[bushido_man96]

A lot of it will depend on how savvy a fighter they are, and how you set it up, too.

If a fighter is experienced, he is probably tucking his chin, which will make it hard for a direct punching attack. A spear hand thrust might get in, but it will still be tough. Also, if he has a good Boxing guard, with his hands up about his face, getting around the guard for knife hand strikes will be tough as well, as they are easy strikes to block.

So, you have to have a plan to make it work.

[USCMAAI]

kinda depends what laws you have where you live. A shot to the throat is a sure fire way of taking an opponent down. if the attacker has a weapon, then you have every right to defend yourself by any means necessary but, if the aggressor does not have a weapon and you hit him only once in the throat and it kills him? to me it would be self defense cause you only hit him once. but sometimes the law doesn't see it that way..

Hitting to the throat is effective, and you are right that you really should know the S.D. laws of your state/country.

However, even if you only hit someone once, you could still be liable (legally and financially) for killing him. Self-defense is a lot harder to claim than people think. Last year I wrote a post on this topic (Use of Force). You might want to read it, before you get into an altercation.

[tallgeese]

It goes back to articulation of the facts and presenting your fear for your life and why the attacker presented a threat that coupld cause you death or great bodily harm. Detail is the key. But, he must actually rise to that level before you escalte.

[joesteph]

However, even if you only hit someone once, you could still be liable (legally and financially) for killing him. Self-defense is a lot harder to claim than people think. Last year I wrote a post on this topic (Use of Force). You might want to read it, before you get into an altercation.

I found it as a June 4, 2007 posting, USCMAAI. I don't know how to link to it, so I quoted a section:

A fellow I have known for years is now in jail for manslaughter. He was at a biker rally this weekend. Another drunk guy came up and pushed him outside of a bar. He hit the guy one time and the fellow just died! Now I have been warning Lance (the guy who hit the other biker) for years that his "take no (blank) from anyone" attitude would eventually get him into trouble. He always responded "I never start a fight I always finnish them". Now he is sitting in jail awaiting his preliminary hearing, and the claim of self-defense will not work.

He must have really given that drunk some shot; too much firepower. The throat strikes we've been discussing can be controlled, such as using limited force or the jugular notch move, so as not to deal a lethal blow.

[joesteph]

. . . articulation of the facts . . .

. . . fear for your life . . .

. . . a threat that coupld cause you death or great bodily harm.

Three very good points made, Tallgeese.

[bushido_man96]

A fellow I have known for years is now in jail for manslaughter. He was at a biker rally this weekend. Another drunk guy came up and pushed him outside of a bar. He hit the guy one time and the fellow just died! Now I have been warning Lance (the guy who hit the other biker) for years that his "take no (blank) from anyone" attitude would eventually get him into trouble. He always responded "I never start a fight I always finnish them". Now he is sitting in jail awaiting his preliminary hearing, and the claim of self-defense will not work.

He must have really given that drunk some shot; too much firepower. The throat strikes we've been discussing can be controlled, such as using limited force or the jugular notch move, so as not to deal a lethal blow.

We all practice control at some level or another in class. However, we can't assume the same kind of control when we are scared, fighting for our safety or our lives. Another we can't control is someone else's actions. We may think to ourselves "I'll just pop him lightly on the throat, and then get away," assuming that you will get the desired result. But, we all know what happens when we assume, and that is when Murphy shows up, and lays down the law. We may attempt a light throat strike, but the attacker may lose his balance and fall, adding force to our strike. Not our fault, nor under our control completely.

I realize that this may not be a common scenario, but it can happen, as can other things. Like, you attempt to trip someone and get away. But, they grab and pull you down as you fall....and your forearm crushes their throat as you attempt to break your fall. Things happen, and we don't always have the control over the situation that we think.

Not to mention the extra umph that adrenaline gives you when you are attacked.

[50inches]

Very effective, but it can be deadly. A knee to the groin still might be the better option.

[Rateh]

When we practice self defense we practice preventing the attacker from comming after you. The saying is "can't see, can't breath, can't walk". We are meant to make at least one of those things happen. Striking the throat and kicking the knees is pretty common in our practice. Striking the groin is almost discouraged as we are taught this can often make the attacker mad instead of our desired result. I prefer to use a tigers paw/long fist (same thing, different name) to the throat.

I agree that there are many factors that go into whether the strike will kill or be noneffective. Personally as a small person, I would aim for the most dabilitating techniques.

[joesteph]

When we practice self defense we practice preventing the attacker from comming after you. The saying is "can't see, can't breath, can't walk". We are meant to make at least one of those things happen. . . .

Personally as a small person, I would aim for the most dabilitating techniques.

The chances are that you, male or female, are likely to be up against a larger adversary, or more than one. In my case, I am also concerned about the age of my attacker(s), who are likely to be younger, stronger, faster than a fifty-seven year old.

I'm not helpless. I'm not going to be a victim. If a shot to the jugular notch using a spear hand (possibly while holding in place the attacker's hand, a hand that grabbed me, say by the shirt), pressing it and having his body yield to the pressure, will allow me to escape, I'm going to use it. If a four-finger joint strike to the throat will stun him (possibly preventing him from grabbing my shirt*), allowing me to escape, again, I'm going to use it. If there should be more than one attacker, the very surprise of his buddy suddenly choking, unable to bark orders at him, may stop him in his tracks while I escape. If it doesn't stop his cohort, at least I have the opportunity to deal with one attacker at a time, not two at once.

The size of your attacker, the number of your attackers, the age of the defender--these are all factors that weigh in both morally as well as legally when fending off an attack and effecting an escape.

_____

*Just today in self-defense jujitsu class, my very first class, Sensei (who is a police officer) identified three feet as the closest you'd let such an individual come up to you. He can talk trash all he wants from that point or beyond, but once within, he's within attacking range--as in attacking you. Stop him as soon as he crosses that line (or, as has been brought up by JohnC, I thought of it as the "trigger point").

[Tiger1962]

How would I articulate that to a police officer that showed up on the scene?

Let me explain: If someone was bothering me on the street and I felt threated, and they came within or closer to the 3 feet range that you mentioned, and I "defended myself" (in whatever way I decided was necessary) and I injured the attacker, how would I explain to the police officer, that "he came within my 3 feet, so I defended myself" or, "he invaded my personal space, so I defended myself"

I always wondered how would I talk myself out of getting arrested if I defended myself and let's say, I was successful at it.