DO YOU FOCUS ON THE TOOL OR THE WEAPON?

[lordscrub]

DO YOU FOCUS ON THE TOOL IN HIS HAND, OR THE WEAPON?

I thought about this topic after a response I got from one of my previous posts about dealing with an armed assailant.
It had to do with taking care of an attacker with a gun, and the person gave an excellent response to the topic but when it got to the part where he was close enough to make contact with the attacker he immediately focused on getting the gun away from the guy, and I began wondering if a lot of other schools teach this same response to weapons.
So I’d love to hear views on this topic from you guys.

Till next time
Lord Scrubanious

[kuri]

What's with giving yourself a 5 star rating?

And yes, I'd focus on his weapon rather than his tool

What is your background Scrub?

[Chops]

Is the guy holding a wrench and a gun???

I think it's fairly common sense that if your opponent has a gun/weapon you should focus on eliminating it. No matter how good you are, a bullett has more force and no discretion.

As for the tool . . . what?

[Chiron]

I've seen some good disarms in styles like Kali but overall disarming is not nearly as practical as some practicioners like to pretend. So the first thing I'd focus on doing is running. lol If that's not possible then I'd focus on breaking his elbow or tearing his eyes out. Whatever's in his hand wont matter at that point.

[BobbyD]

I agree Chiron. Run, find your own weapon...
After teaching 'standard' knife disarms you would find in Kali or Krav Maga I would give a Magic marker to a student to simulate a knife and have a another student defend empty hand. The result? The cool disarms need more practice

I am not worried that my students are thinking 'the stuff bobby teaches doesn't work' . I sleep better knowing that i did them a great service while they wash ink marks off instead of blood.

As a side note at the last Dog bros gathering cattleprods were used to simulate a closer emotional response of a blade.

[lordscrub]

chiron you hit it on the head. for those that were wondering a put the question like that to see if anyone would figure out what I meant by weapon and tool. the tool is the knife, club, gun, and the weapon is his brain. without his brain he can't control the tool.

I have a site here for anyone who wants to check it out. some probably saw it already. video.google.com/videoplay

[kuri]

OK, I'll bite. How would you take out his brain?
(please, no more Matt Furey links)

Those three weapons are inherently different so obviously the way in which one would deal with an attacker wielding each one would differ. And you better pray the guy doesn't know how to use them either, or without your own weapon you are in some trouble.

Speaking of Dogg Brothers have you seen what happens in their matches when one guy loses his weapon? And those guys are trained.

[lordscrub]

you shut it down via his CNS, and those guys were most likely trained to be weapons fighters not trained to fight with weapons, meaning when the weapon was gone they felt naked, a knife does'nt make you more dangerous it simply allows you to do something your bare hands can't, which is primarily penetrate the body and accellerate trauma, and you understnad that which is more of a reason to make sure that your the one dilivering the violence but you don't need it to be dangerous because I'm sure everyone here knows how to take another human without a weapon.
In the system that I follow there are no differences in the principles to when your facing an unarmed man or if he's holding a weapon but I know thats kinna hard to wrap your brain around and I'm sorry I even mentioned it because I know where this will inevitably lead to now

[BobbyD]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you shut it down via his CNS, and those guys were most likely trained to be weapons fighters not trained to fight with weapons, meaning when the weapon was gone they felt naked,

+Many of the Dog bros are my former training partners. They are well versed in empty hand training including Muay Thai, BJJ, JKD Krav Maga ect.

a knife does'nt make you more dangerous it simply allows you to do something your bare hands can't, which is primarily penetrate the body and accellerate trauma,

+That sounds like the knife attacker would be more dangerous.

and you understnad that which is more of a reason to make sure that your the one dilivering the violence but you don't need it to be dangerous because I'm sure everyone here knows how to take another human without a weapon.
In the system that I follow there are no differences in the principles to when your facing an unarmed man or if he's holding a weapon but I know thats kinna hard to wrap your brain around and I'm sorry I even mentioned it because I know where this will inevitably lead to now

+The video you posted shows there is a difference between empty hands and weapons defense including the size of the weapon.
Also note the policemen are trained and EXPIERENCEd to recognize the physical and emotional cues of an attacker not to mention they were told in advance. The odds don't look good to me.
No need to feel sorry. The forum is for open minded people to discuss right?

[Torm]

Originally Posted by lordscrub

you shut it down via his CNS, and those guys were most likely trained to be weapons fighters not trained to fight with weapons, meaning when the weapon was gone they felt naked, a knife does'nt make you more dangerous it simply allows you to do something your bare hands can't, which is primarily penetrate the body and accellerate trauma, and you understnad that which is more of a reason to make sure that your the one dilivering the violence but you don't need it to be dangerous because I'm sure everyone here knows how to take another human without a weapon.
In the system that I follow there are no differences in the principles to when your facing an unarmed man or if he's holding a weapon but I know thats kinna hard to wrap your brain around and I'm sorry I even mentioned it because I know where this will inevitably lead to now

The dogfights guys actually train their movements full force unlike the flashy "weapon disarms" that many martial arts teach. Most people, trained or not, will lose against a knife simply because any idiot can easily do a large amount of damage with one. A buddy of mine was almost killed recently and when it happened he was on the ground bleeding and unable to get up before he even realized the other guy even had a knife. Real life rarely turns out like a Segal movie does and all the strength and training in the world don't help when you're bleeding from the neck before you realize you've been attacked.

Others in this thread have mentioned eye gouging, which is another move you NEVER hear of succeeding against an assailant in the news. The human body is wired to protect the eyes instinctively; they're a harder target to hit than most martial arts would have you believe. IMO if you can't train the move against a fully resisting opponent, you can't rely on it in a pinch.

[Chiron]

Originally Posted by Torm

Others in this thread have mentioned eye gouging, which is another move you NEVER hear of succeeding against an assailant in the news. The human body is wired to protect the eyes instinctively; they're a harder target to hit than most martial arts would have you believe. IMO if you can't train the move against a fully resisting opponent, you can't rely on it in a pinch.

You don't hear of people getting eye gouged much in the news, but you don't hear of many other techniques in the news either. Hell, the only thing I remember hearing a guy use on an armed assailant was a gas station attendant using his 2nd degree black belt TKD successfully on a robber. Hardly the most effective style for self-defense. But it's not like they are going to have moves people used on the news - "Man puts assailant in rear naked choke: Film at eleven." Plus people rarely go for eyes. There's no reason to in anything but a life threatening situation. It's not something a lot of people will do in a typical pissing match fight. You can try to instinctively protect your eyes all you want, it doesn't mean they aren't going to get hit. Just like the groin. Hell, in MMA people get thumbs in the eye all the time and the striker isn't even aiming for them. Do they not get hurt because they instinctively protect them? Nope. They get poked and get stunned just like anyone else. Besides, while someone is trying to protect their eyes, it's harder to use them for much else, like trying to see where to hit you. So I still say going for the eyes is one of the best options against an armed opponent. Next to running of course.

[Torm]

Originally Posted by Chiron

Besides, while someone is trying to protect their eyes, it's harder to use them for much else, like trying to see where to hit you. So I still say going for the eyes is one of the best options against an armed opponent.

Eye gouging can't be practiced, so it is unknown if it will even work in a situation. An armed assailant isn't going to sit there and let another person jab at their eyes while standing still, and if the would-be eye gouger misses then that person is probably going to get really hurt. You can bet that if some assailant suffered an injury as gory as having their eyes gouged out that it would make the news (yet, again, it hasn't).

In short, my opinion is that all of these paranoid martial arts fantasies where the martial artist is backed into a corner of an alley and has to use ninja-deathstrikes to fight their way out are downright hilarious. A person would be better off training with effective joint locks and other movements which can actually be practiced and relied on or, better yet, handing over the wallet and/or running.

[Chiron]

Originally Posted by Torm

Eye gouging can't be practiced, so it is unknown if it will even work in a situation. An armed assailant isn't going to sit there and let another person jab at their eyes while standing still, and if the would-be eye gouger misses then that person is probably going to get really hurt. You can bet that if some assailant suffered an injury as gory as having their eyes gouged out that it would make the news (yet, again, it hasn't).

You can't practice eye-gouging 100% but you can practice it. In Wing Chun we used to practice it all the time. Aside from the forms (which were next to useless) we used to attack each other with headgear and face masks. But it doesn't take much training anyway since it's so basic. All you do is ram a finger or knuckle into an eye. Not too complicated. Unlike most moves where you first have to control someones arm to some degree and then do a disarm all the while they're just standing there like a retard. I'll agree an eye gouge is risky. I'd much rather run or throw something at the attacker. But standing in a melee doing anything against an armed attacker is risky. Is someone attempting a disarm going to fare any better? Nope. And again, you don't find people eye gouging in the news. But you don't find them doing much of any other move in the news either. I've never seen it in the news where the reporter says a person fought off an attacker using the Dog brothers disarm method. So by your own rationale, aren't those claims just faulty as you claim eye gouging to be?

In short, my opinion is that all of these paranoid martial arts fantasies where the martial artist is backed into a corner of an alley and has to use ninja-deathstrikes to fight their way out are downright hilarious. A person would be better off training with effective joint locks and other movements which can actually be practiced and relied on or, better yet, handing over the wallet and/or running.

Ya, I can agree with that. And I do think practicing joint locks is a good idea. I just think most of them aren't nearly as effective as many martial artists believe against an armed attacker.

[lordscrub]

Originally Posted by BobbyD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you shut it down via his CNS, and those guys were most likely trained to be weapons fighters not trained to fight with weapons, meaning when the weapon was gone they felt naked,

+Many of the Dog bros are my former training partners. They are well versed in empty hand training including Muay Thai, BJJ, JKD Krav Maga ect.

a knife does'nt make you more dangerous it simply allows you to do something your bare hands can't, which is primarily penetrate the body and accellerate trauma,

+That sounds like the knife attacker would be more dangerous.

and you understnad that which is more of a reason to make sure that your the one dilivering the violence but you don't need it to be dangerous because I'm sure everyone here knows how to take another human without a weapon.
In the system that I follow there are no differences in the principles to when your facing an unarmed man or if he's holding a weapon but I know thats kinna hard to wrap your brain around and I'm sorry I even mentioned it because I know where this will inevitably lead to now

+The video you posted shows there is a difference between empty hands and weapons defense including the size of the weapon.
Also note the policemen are trained and EXPIERENCEd to recognize the physical and emotional cues of an attacker not to mention they were told in advance. The odds don't look good to me.
No need to feel sorry. The forum is for open minded people to discuss right?

not going to touch much on the dog brothers cause I honestly don't know much about them, but I can guess just like you they were taught that the knife held overwelming power and that they had to respect it, as well the video I posted has absolutly nothing to do with TFT and or its principles, I just taught it interesting when I first saw it. Especialy in the ending when the guy said its better to just dance around the guy with the knife until he gets fed up of you, man that made me laugh, he honestly did'nt see the prison footages of people getting stabbed as apposed to the slashing they were showing on the tap.

In short I don't want to have a pissing contest to see who's kung fu is better, what works for you works for you, I was simply shown another way of thinking on the topic of violence that totally changed the way I look at "self defence" for lack of a better word because I no longer see it as defending myself, and at times I get a little excited about it and forget that not everyone can see things the way you do.

[Torm]

Originally Posted by lordscrub

not going to touch much on the dog brothers cause I honestly don't know much about them, but I can guess just like you they were taught that the knife held overwelming power and that they had to respect it.

A knife, even in clumsy hands, can end a life in a second. I'd say thats worthy of both caution and respect and only a fool would think otherwise. I related a real-life story of a friend earlier in this same thread who survived a stabbing yet didn't even realize his assailant had a knife until it was over. This is a common thing to hear about in knife attacks since only the dumbest muggers are going to wave one around before attacking.

[getgot211]

you owe me 5 minutes.

[Irishdazza]

Originally Posted by getgot211

you owe me 5 minutes.

Did you pinch that from me!?!?!? Or come up with it independently?

Anyhoo...gave me a giggle!