Disqualifications in MMA are Reality on the Streets

[MatsuShinshii]

Sorry Alan. I still do not understand how a marker can be helpful in simulating a gun unless you are taping a grip to it.

That and I'm not sure why you are training for 0 distance confrontations with a gun. I've never met someone that can close the distance faster than I can put a round in their dome. Not to say that preparedness is not a good idea, I just don't ever see it happening. The MA's teaches one to read the intentions of others and if carrying, I would think that most, I would, would be able to identify the threat, pull their fire arm and squeeze off a round before the attacked could close the distance to necessitate the need to learn 0 distance shooting.

If they are that close because you have emptied your mag and missed every shot you would have better luck throwing the pistol at them and running away. That and you should not be able to carry a fire arm in the first place if you can't hit the broad side of a barn that close anyway. The danger of hitting innocents is to great.

I just do not see the need for this type of training. I was with you on the knife. You have totally lost me with the gun.

[bushido_man96]

And I agree with you about sharp blades. They are dangerous. But so are real firearms. Are you suggesting that people can learn to shoot without time on the range with actual ammo? Same thing applies.

I disagree. I have had a rifle or pistol in my hand since I was very young and the premise that they are one in the same while practicing with them is not in my mind even close. The premise of this discussion is practicing with a resisting opponent with a knife. That means that the opponent is trying to score hits and so are you, attack and defend. If you were to liken this type of one on one practice to a fire arm you wouldn't call it practice because practice has the connotation that you are able to do the exercise again. This type of practice with a fire arm is final and can not be repeated. This would not even be called practice, it would be called battle. The person that looses dies.

Not necessarily. Simunitions training is fantastic training.

[Alan Armstrong]

Sorry Alan. I still do not understand how a marker can be helpful in simulating a gun unless you are taping a grip to it.

That and I'm not sure why you are training for 0 distance confrontations with a gun. I've never met someone that can close the distance faster than I can put a round in their dome. Not to say that preparedness is not a good idea, I just don't ever see it happening. The MA's teaches one to read the intentions of others and if carrying, I would think that most, I would, would be able to identify the threat, pull their fire arm and squeeze off a round before the attacked could close the distance to necessitate the need to learn 0 distance shooting.

If they are that close because you have emptied your mag and missed every shot you would have better luck throwing the pistol at them and running away. That and you should not be able to carry a fire arm in the first place if you can't hit the broad side of a barn that close anyway. The danger of hitting innocents is to great.

I just do not see the need for this type of training. I was with you on the knife. You have totally lost me with the gun.

Here are a few principles regarding weapons:

"Be behind the weapon and never in front of it"

"Always keep your weapon pointing at the opponent"

Guns fire bullets, they don't slash, stab and the rest of it, therefore they're more predictable in that respect as they are made and designed to kill.

Reality dictates which actions and options to use when being attacked with or without weapons.

Principles are incredibly important, as training to save your life depends on knowing them, instinctively.

I'm not interested in talking rubbish about self defence techniques from guns.

Martial artists can easily forget that guns can fire deadly projectiles from a safe distance, that no martial art technique can stop.

If a person points a gun at another person but hesitates or doesn't have the intent to shoot, then of course a disarm technique will work.

However if a gun is at 0 distance from the target/person then very much depending on the situation, a slim chance might be available to defend against it; the safety latch is on, the gun isn't loaded or the intent to shoot has been delayed.

Being held up by gunpoint, that might not be a gun at all, it might be a knife, no matter, it's time to seize the moment.

Evasive tactics from; guns, knifes, sticks or stones, should all be understood and practiced, by martial artists, that claim to have self defense knowledge.

This is one of those subjects, that the more you know, the more you understand that there is alot more to know.

[MatsuShinshii]

Alan,

To be quite honest I have never taught gun disarms because I am a Marine and not only know it is futile in 99% of situations but as a Marine if it were me holding the gun the trigger would be pulled without giving you the chance to use some fancy disarm.

As such I personally see no reason to train for this.

If a person has a gun, unless your superman or wearing a bullet proof vest, and has the intended purpose of using it to harm or kill you and is not at zero distance, (ok when does this happen? can our cops here join the conversation? When does a bad guy with the intent to shoot you walk right up on you to zero distance before shooting?) the only chance you have is if the guy can't shoot. In this case run and hope he misses. Adrenalin is coursing in BOTH of you and you have a better chance of leaving unscathed by running than trying to close the distance to try one of the worthless self defense moves most instructors teach you. If the guy does come up on you it's typically to rob you in which case your belongings are not worth the risk of your life trying to be a hero.

You are absolutely right that guns shoot a projectile. And it's faster than anyone here or anyone in the world for that matter can move out of it's path. So if your at distance what good does disarms do? If your close range it is doubtful that the guy is intent on shooting you in which case why would you escalate the chances of being shot by trying to disarm him. You have just increased your odds of ending up in the morgue rather than in the news as a hero. Maybe I've not had enough experience with armed thugs on the street and maybe they are stupid enough to walk right up to zero range on their intended target. But not in the world I have experience in. Having said that I personally see no reason to train for disarms when the reality, in my mind (I could be wrong which is why I'd like to hear from our cops on the forum) a guy with the intent to shoot you is going to do so at a distance that a disarm is impossible in the first place. You have a better chance of survival (I didn't say of not getting shot) running away than trying to close the distance and tangle with an armed person holding a gun.

Better choice, forget the fancy self defense moves and get your concealed carry and learn how to shoot well under duress if your that worried about it. Other than that you're just wasting your time IMHO.

[singularity6]

Is it just me, or has this thread taken on it's own life?

[Spartacus Maximus]

Guns are obviously made for killing from a distance and as such those who intend to kill with a gun never get closer than needed to shoot. The only type of situation when a gun is drawn at close range(in arms reach) is to threaten or coerce. A mugging, a robbery or taking a hostage for instance. Knives, on the other hand must be used at close range. And yet again, when killing is the intent the knife is not shown or brandished.

Gun disarms might work, but only if trained consistently AND if used with a set up to engage the mind of the attacker. This is the same thing criminals use to distract their victims before suddenly attacking. Still there is a good reason why gun disarms are not recommended: They are incredibly dangerous to attempt and have a very small probability of working.

[bushido_man96]

If a person has a gun, unless your superman or wearing a bullet proof vest, and has the intended purpose of using it to harm or kill you and is not at zero distance, (ok when does this happen? can our cops here join the conversation? When does a bad guy with the intent to shoot you walk right up on you to zero distance before shooting?) the only chance you have is if the guy can't shoot. In this case run and hope he misses. Adrenalin is coursing in BOTH of you and you have a better chance of leaving unscathed by running than trying to close the distance to try one of the worthless self defense moves most instructors teach you. If the guy does come up on you it's typically to rob you in which case your belongings are not worth the risk of your life trying to be a hero.

I can help with this a bit. A high percentage of gun fights (or violence involving a firearm) in the civilian population happen within 3 to 5 feet from the assailant. I'm sorry, I don't have a number for you, but I think its upward of 80%. Maybe Alex has some better stats.

In the Police Krav Maga program I've been through, I've trained both long gun retention and disarms and pistol retention and disarms. They tell us up front in regards to gun disarms that these disarms pertain to the type of attack in which the armed individual is using the gun to intimidate, threaten, or take something from you or take you somewhere against your will. So, its the situation in which a suspect puts a gun in your face and begins talking and threatening you for whatever reason. They have other options for those in which a person draws or presents a gun and just pulls the trigger.

With all that said, I would say that situations dealt with in the civilian population would be different than those dealt with in the military, especially during active duty.

Better choice, forget the fancy self defense moves and get your concealed carry and learn how to shoot well under duress if your that worried about it. Other than that you're just wasting your time IMHO.

Good to know both. The problem I see with concealed carry, and I tell this to everyone who is even thinking about thinking about carrying concealed, they have to make sure to they know how they are going to carry it, where at on their person, and they have to train on how to draw and get to threat ready position from where they plan to carry it. Its so much more than just learning how to shoot the gun.

[MatsuShinshii]

Guns are obviously made for killing from a distance and as such those who intend to kill with a gun never get closer than needed to shoot. The only type of situation when a gun is drawn at close range(in arms reach) is to threaten or coerce. A mugging, a robbery or taking a hostage for instance. Knives, on the other hand must be used at close range. And yet again, when killing is the intent the knife is not shown or brandished.

Gun disarms might work, but only if trained consistently AND if used with a set up to engage the mind of the attacker. This is the same thing criminals use to distract their victims before suddenly attacking. Still there is a good reason why gun disarms are not recommended: They are incredibly dangerous to attempt and have a very small probability of working.

To the bold, Exactly!

[MatsuShinshii]

If a person has a gun, unless your superman or wearing a bullet proof vest, and has the intended purpose of using it to harm or kill you and is not at zero distance, (ok when does this happen? can our cops here join the conversation? When does a bad guy with the intent to shoot you walk right up on you to zero distance before shooting?) the only chance you have is if the guy can't shoot. In this case run and hope he misses. Adrenalin is coursing in BOTH of you and you have a better chance of leaving unscathed by running than trying to close the distance to try one of the worthless self defense moves most instructors teach you. If the guy does come up on you it's typically to rob you in which case your belongings are not worth the risk of your life trying to be a hero.

I can help with this a bit. A high percentage of gun fights (or violence involving a firearm) in the civilian population happen within 3 to 5 feet from the assailant. I'm sorry, I don't have a number for you, but I think its upward of 80%. Maybe Alex has some better stats.

In the Police Krav Maga program I've been through, I've trained both long gun retention and disarms and pistol retention and disarms. They tell us up front in regards to gun disarms that these disarms pertain to the type of attack in which the armed individual is using the gun to intimidate, threaten, or take something from you or take you somewhere against your will. So, its the situation in which a suspect puts a gun in your face and begins talking and threatening you for whatever reason. They have other options for those in which a person draws or presents a gun and just pulls the trigger.

With all that said, I would say that situations dealt with in the civilian population would be different than those dealt with in the military, especially during active duty.

Better choice, forget the fancy self defense moves and get your concealed carry and learn how to shoot well under duress if your that worried about it. Other than that you're just wasting your time IMHO.

Good to know both. The problem I see with concealed carry, and I tell this to everyone who is even thinking about thinking about carrying concealed, they have to make sure to they know how they are going to carry it, where at on their person, and they have to train on how to draw and get to threat ready position from where they plan to carry it. Its so much more than just learning how to shoot the gun.

It maybe where I live but I've never even entertained carrying a gun except during hunting season and that is just to deal with Coyotes during bow season. That and I don't purposely travel back alleys or go to the local drug hang outs. I don't put myself in sketchy situations. I guess I think of this as common sense that going into a bad neighborhood or walking down dark alleys is probably something that you should avoid. I have never found myself in a situation like this so I have never felt the need to carry a gun or to teach gun disarms.

Don't get me wrong, back in the 80's and 90's my association was on the so called self defense kick and they taught disarms. After seeing it from the real side of gun use I have never understood why you would even attempt to disarm someone with a gun. For one the chances of being shot are high because you are essentially taught to trap the hand with the gun but in real life the opponent doesn't hold still to apply your ultra cool technique and it is a fraction of a second and your shot. The other thing I don't understand about disarms is the fact that you are in effect trying to not only get the gun but hold the assailant. Why? If your going to commit to engage, you shouldn't be doing so with locks or stripping the gun, you should be taking them out (I mean dead). Neutralize the threat all together.

I'm sure if practiced you could have a margin of success against a percentage of attackers. In my mind this equals shot the other percentage. Unless your life is at risk why would you increase your odds. As soon as you go for the gun you commit that person into defending themselves which mean using it.

Maybe I'm wrong but if an idiot actually gets up in my face with a gun, thats to intimidate you to get something, typically your cash. In knowing this I can only think of a few reasons you would engage them rather than letting them have what they want and allowing them to run away.

1. if their demeanor changes - they get upset or become angry. Your life is at risk.

2. if you just want to show off your new disarming skills and be on TV. Hero complex.

3. you have a death wish or like to gamble with your life and those around you. suicidal or thrill seeker.

To me there is only one reason to engage someone carrying a gun. My life is in jeopardy. In which case i'm not going to disarm the creep and detain him for police. I'm going to use deadly force and neutralize them. If not I'm going to just allow him to take my wallet and then I'll call my bank to cancel my cards, call the police and make a report and go home to my family, which at the end of the day is all most of us want to do.

I also get what you are saying, however if I ever find myself in this type of situation, I think I would just give them the cash. The thing that most MAist's do not consider in this scenario is the fact that rounds (bullets) travel beyond the confrontation area and even if you are successful in disarming the perp someone else may not be so lucky if a round gets squeezed off. That and 95% of the time if I'm out in area's that something like this would occur (Parking lots, sports outings, etc.) it is a high likely hood that my wife or family members would be with me. I don't think it's worth the risk to disarm someone that is desperate enough to rob someone at gun point with the sole goal of taking their cash and running away. I can make more cash but you can't make another family member.

And I appreciate the stats and don't doubt them. I guess we have a bunch of stupid criminals in the world. If I were bent on taking someones life I wouldn't walk up on them to within arms reach to shoot them so this scenario never even crossed my mind. I wouldn't think anyone would be this stupid.

[Alan Armstrong]

Being related to and spending alot of time with a person, that is required to carry a gun 24/7 as a law enforcement officer, is involving me by association.

The perspective in society is very different now than it once was in the past, such as public places that were once deemed as being normal, low level risk for violent acts, are now high risk as potentially dangerous locations, whereas traditional places of violence are not so much now, due to being monitored and patrolled by professional security personnel.

What I am saying is that, rules of engagement/defense from and against potentially dangerous people has changed and evolved, in to very unpredictable ways and places, therefore awareness for martial artists needs to be modified, for more possibilities of danger, than ever before.