Do you live by levels of escalation?

[Truestar]

In any situation where conflict is possible we have different levels of that fight and how it escalates. Do you create your own rules? Does your school have rules you follow?

Police officers are allowed to use one level higher in a conflict in order to maintain control of a situation. Do you have the same philosophy?

The five levels we learn of which I believe are widespread taught (not sure though) are:

Heightened Awareness

Avoidance/Verbalization

Light Contact/Controlling Technique

Heavy contact/Combative technique

Deadly physical force

Do you have similar rules/philosophy?

[tallgeese]

Not named as such, but then again we try not to do too much labeling. A good understanding of use of force laws in our locality was always a priority, but not an actual series of levels as taught.

Typically, as I think back, we tended to adhear to the one+one theory. Or the one level above as you mentioned. I suppose that teaching this could be benifical to a ma-ist. Even a cop now for several years, I can't say that I go into detail with this type of continuum with the guys I train with now.

I think that we can go overboard sometimes in "listing" things for students. So, I try to keep it to a minimum. Major principles and such. It's less thinking to get in the way of fighting once your tools are engrained in you thinking. A degree of it is needed simply due to the nature of trying to pass on ideas. However, sometimes it's taken out of hand.

Still, this one probibly wouldn't be a bad idea.

[The BB of C]

That's basically how I live, yes.

[joesteph]

The five levels are clear and concise. This posting caused me to look for an age-old Chinese saying that I'm sure everyone's heard parts of:

"Build rather than destroy; Avoid rather than check; Check rather than hurt; Hurt rather than maim; Maim rather than kill; For all life is precious; Nor can any be replaced" - Shaolin Monastery Credo

This came from a site called The Harmonious Fist Chinese Athletic Association, and its URL is:

http://www.harmoniousfist.com/the24elements.html

[bushido_man96]

I don't go looking for trouble, so if someone is going to start some with me, then they must be pretty intent on getting their goal accomplished. I keep that in mind, and if I feel the need, I will escalate to a higher use of force. If I feel I can walk away, I will. But if they are going to come to me, then they forfeit their chance to get the benefit of the doubt. I won't assume that they are unarmed. I won't assume that they are unskilled. I'll assume the worst, and act accordingly, morally and ethically.

[Tiger1962]

I'm sort of the same way in that I don't start trouble nor do I go looking for it. But, if someone starts with me, I try to quickly assess the situation and act accordingly. I will admit though, sometimes, my tolerance level is low especially after a horrific day at work and if someone pushes the wrong buttons, I might react quicker & with more force than I normally would. I'm no doormat but I'm not a martyr either.

[pittbullJudoka]

I'll have to agree with Bushido_man on this one. I look at it as if it were myself or the other person. And personally I want to be the one to walk away.

[cross]

I won't assume that they are unarmed. I won't assume that they are unskilled. I'll assume the worst, and act accordingly, morally and ethically.

Spot on. The only 2 safe assumptions you can make in a self defense situation is that:

1. the other person is armed, and

2. the other person has friends

Assume anything else and you leave your self vulnerable to several problems.