Karate defence against aggressive?

[devil dog]

Move out of the way. It's as easy as stepping to one side and as they pass they offer up a slew of targets. If your more of the grappling type step to the outside and as they pass throw them using their momentum.

I understand that it is sometimes scary when someone like this attacks you but the number one component in any altercation is to keep your head so you can capitalize on their mistakes. By staying calm you can think clearly and your emotions do not cause you to make mistakes. Highly aggresive opponents usually get to emotional and go berzerk which is when they make stupid mistakes. If someone charges head first at you, their head is down. What better target? They do not see it coming and you can practice putting their head thru the up rights.

On a more serious note; as a karateka you should not be looking for the altercation. If they are constantly engaging you then switch up your routine. If they wait for you then take a different route.

The best way to end a fight is not to put yourself into one in the first place. You win everytime and no one goes to the hospital.

The only reason I say this is because of the way you wrote the post seems like your looking for the fight. This never ends well especially if it is a group of guys. Best advice is to avoid them all together and if they do corner you maintain your composure and try to talk your way out of it. If that does not work be prepared to engage multiple opponents. If you take one down the others will want to take you on as well. Trust me I've been there. Like I said it doesn't end well.

[Hawkmoon]

(Bit of an essay ... sorry!)

hmm... if I may, the mind, the idea, the way this is looked at, the mind set is wrong and should be changed as a priority!

In my best Mr Miyagi voice:

"Rule number 1, karate for defense only.

Rule number 2 learn rule number 1"

The post title says:

Karate defense against aggressive?

Can I offer a better title would be something like:

Defense against aggressive people?

or maybe

Defense against aggression?

I do get there is a contradiction in terms when we say Defense only and Martial Art.

to me once the idea of MA is corrected, you can review the approach to the situation, what ever it is.

Then, to me the best defense for dealing with an aggressor or aggressive situation is to not be a threat to the other party!

In a conflict one person feels threatened, that they are at risk of pain, in all its brutality gore and hurt!

No one has hit anyone yet, the imagination is running amok and the imagery is fueling the body (adrenaline and endorphin etc) preparing the body for fight or flight.

A normal human default reaction when under threat, we are born with this reflex in us, its in our genes, its normal!

So to mind set...

MA teaches you to control this behavior and arms you with the skills to deal with either action ... fight or flight!

MA teaches, defense only (flight) but it teaches 'fight' if flight is not possible, it's how you get to this point that is important and so we return to non threatening behavior non aggressive stance, passive posture and so on.

An angry person who is determined to attack, to fight to hurt will have one idea in their head, the idea is simple...attack!

There is no idea number 2, attack is all they see, beat you, bully you, knock you down...nothing at all about" "what if I get beaten to a pulp", nothing, nadda, zip, big fat empty empty space, no "what if" about anything, just attack.

MA teaches you to present idea number 2 to them, to have them ask "what if?"

No I don't mean, you scream:

"Well I gonna if you do !"

A non threatening, non aggressive and 100% calm response, head up, relaxed eyes, (the critical point - relaxed eyes!) that has them ask themselves 'Why?' (the birth of idea number 2)

You are not friends at this point, don't shoulder chug them and go for a drink, show open hands (no weapons) relaxed eyes (confidence, without arrogance) relaxed chat, not fast, no big words, plain simple easy speech.

Talk them down let them have the ideas and support the good ones and "idea number 2" the bad ones!!

If fight is the only response, the only thing they see, MA has taught you how to fight and given you all the tools.

use them to full effect and end it.

They have chosen this position, they no longer care for you or the outcome, law, rules nothing, so consider your actions and how you end the situation and make sure you have nothing difficult to explain, no grey areas, to cover when the police ask what happened.

[sensei8]

Solid post...solid points!!

Fight or flight, at times, isn't always something to consider before an attack occurs because knowing just what the other's thinking is impossible. Being aggressive, is a choice, and the choice is up to said person because of perceptions. Perception is real to said person at that very moment.

[Hawkmoon]

... an old thread and not the one I recall that I was actually looking for.

Sorry can't find it if someone does (mad as this sounds) work out the thread I'm referring to please speak up!

This is close to the same subject, in that the concept of training at all is to protect you and yours ...

The thread I was looking for looked at MA with a view to getting to grips with the LAW surrounding it.

(I made a comment about 'having no grey areas or regrests about your actions...."?)

Below are some quotes the powers that be in the UK:

Case: Law v Beckford 1988 AC130 – Lord Griffith on force in the question of self-defence.

“The common law has always recognised as one of these circumstances the right of a person to protect himself from attack and to act in the defence of others, if necessary to inflict violence on another in so doing. If no more force is used than is reasonable to repel the attack, such force is not unlawful and no crime is committed”

“Furthermore, a man about to be attacked does not have to wait for his assailant to strike the first blow or fire the first shot, circumstances may justify a pre-emptive strike”.

This next one was interesting only because the police officer unfortunately became a target!

can't speak for the rest of the world, but in the UK, an officer in or out of uniform is required to present upon request there 'Warrent card', a card that proves/confirms they are an officer of the Law.

Simply, "no card, no officer!

So why the interest?

No, nothing to do with giving an officer a hard time at all, I've a couple of buddies in the service. No the interest is due to a theoretical scenario (and as the next piece shows) that can happen very easily,and it worries me a little!

So ...

To impersonate an officer of Law is a crime, to attack an officer of the law is a crime, so...read on....

Case: R v Williams 1984 78CAR276 – A plain-clothes police officer was attempting to arrest a youth, he had identified himself as a police officer, but failed to produce a warrant card. A passing member of the public believed the police officer to be assaulting the youth went to his assistance and assaulted the police officer.

In this case the prosecution could not prove the unlawfulness of his actions, although the assault on the officer was a mistake:

the actions ... “have to be judged on his belief at the time, its unreasonableness, so far as guilt or innocence was concerned, was irrelevant”.

“The jury having been directed that the passing member of the public had an honest belief, based on reasonable grounds that reasonable force was necessary to prevent the crime”.

This does not give you the right to 'fight' because someone looks at you in a funny way, but it does offer you the defense, the option you don’t have to wait to get hit/assaulted before you defend yourself.

FYI:

A myth here in the UK about the ‘3 warnings that you do Karate’ is..... a myth!

So that said ...

What is necessary or minimal force?

How can you judge what will stop an attack?

[Spartacus Maximus]

The best defenition of reasonable force or minimal force is whatever force is required to allow the defender to successfully break away from and escape the attacker(s).

If this sounds ambiguous, it is because what it takes to escape can vary depending on the situation. The most important guideline is that one's goal is to escape at the first opportunity. It is not always necessary, nor is it justifiable to completely incapacitate the a attacker. It is better and more practical to think in terms of creating an opening to break and run, rather than stop the assailants attack. This should never require more than 3 moves or techniques.

[Sentoka]

What are the techniques of defending against aggressive people? I usually have a tough time with them, especially if they have done football or similar, as they charge fast and low.

Are you applying this in a controlled environment? Or are you in crowd control or law enforcement?

I've always found a sprawl works well, and depending whether i'm working i'll back step and attempt to continue force downwards to incapacitate and regain distance/attempt to restrain and remove. If i'm mucking around in the dojo ill generally apply a guillotine and take to the ground (Note: positional asphyxia and "ground fighting" is a huge no-no in self defense, both from a legal and safety standpoint)

Which leads me to another question.. Can one use football as a martial arts? Would a professional football player be able to survive against a professional martial arts person in a ring?

Most likely not. Supplementary skills do have a flow on effect between sports, but if you're a footballer fighting a Kyokushin fighter for example, under their conditions, you're gonna have a bad time.

My best advice would be to first recognise the situation you're finding yourself in. If you're trying things out in the dojo, cool! Keep going, have a blast. But do yourself a huge favour and differentiate between aggression in the dojo, professional fighting, and real world violence. Aggression takes on a very different appearance in each one. At times in your post it seems you're blurring the lines between each.

[Spartacus Maximus]

Recognizing what type of violence or agreesion one is dealing with is a very important skill to develop. Obviously, one cannot respond to all types the same way. If one does so, it invariably puts one in unnecessary danger as well as more than likely the wrong side of the law.

There are two types of violent/aggressive behaviour. The first is social and the second is predatory or criminal. In social violence the aggressor uses it to get the victim to do something or stop doing something. There is always a choice and it is easily avoidable before the first strike.

Criminal violence is much simpler as the attacker's sole purpose is to injure, maim or murder for its own sake, or to take something. This makes it much more unpredictable and dangerous.

[lowereastside]

IMHO - you have to attack the attack - a calm mind and at the same time wanting to take someone's head off. The problem is people are people - look what happens when a movie theater catches fire - people panic - they get crazy aggressive and more people are killed form trampling than the fire itself. To change human nature is not easy - we often do it to ourselves. Just my 3 cents.

[brickshooter]

In highschool I had issues with a linebacker that outweighed me by about 60 pounds. I used a Judo footsweep after I wrist locked him. He threatenned to sue me the next day. For a football player, he didn't fall gracefully and threw out his back.

Will it work again? I dunno. But football players like going in only one ditlrection - forward. And they love to grab your arms and wrists if they can't grab you around the waist.

[The Pred]

In highschool I had issues with a linebacker that outweighed me by about 60 pounds. I used a Judo footsweep after I wrist locked him. He threatenned to sue me the next day. For a football player, he didn't fall gracefully and threw out his back.

Will it work again? I dunno. But football players like going in only one ditlrection - forward. And they love to grab your arms and wrists if they can't grab you around the waist.

It's shame that we live in legalistic society. If one wants to start trouble with someone, one should be prepared to deal with the consequences.

PS. Suing someone because you lost the fight to someone is just cowardly.