"... don't look at his eyes." ???

[BigG]

Edward, we have the same thought that people who won't look you in the eye are not to be trusted.

Agree with this 100%

[look at] ... upper chest so you can see the whole body...

Excellent tactic especially for the young and nubile.

[igor]

Hamilton has thought this through. Very well structured, good stuff.

[pbarrick]

Anybody that I don't know that's within what Kelly McCann calls an "activity zone" is not to be trusted. Overall body language will tell you more than watching their eyes. The majority of communication is non-verbal.

Movements are what can hurt you. A defuse, non-focused gaze at the mid- to upper-torso level will allow you to pick up movements with your peripheral vision by picking up on shoulder and hand movements. It's faster than direct vision at picking up such movements and will allow you to react to his initiating action at the earliest possible moment.

As to whether or not someone who won't look at you can be trusted, if it were that simple cops would have an easier job. And all it takes is one exception to that "rule" to really screw up your day. Do you really want to bet your safety on generalizations that probably don't apply across the board? Watch for movement.

[LiveWire]

Remember that during a fight, you're going to have tunnel-vision.

I've always wondered: Do flies ever get tunnel vision?


How many tunnels?


Seriously, it isn't the eyes you look at in a gunfight. You need to be keen on the enemy's gestalt (entire body language). Put another way, you need to amplify your awareness. Only then will your defensive training provide you the necessary means to adroitly reciprocate your enemy's moves.

You will act; but you will always do so according to what you've gathered from the big picture.

[M1911]

But what are those clues that you are looking for? What is the body language that tells you this is a dangerous person? Clearly, if he displays a gun, that's a pretty good clue. But what body language would have told you before he produced the gun that he was trouble?

M1911

[Betty]

Darren Laur did an excellent essay few months ago on "street 101", the behavior of the aggressor just before he attacks the victim.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...hreadid=123215

[Edward429451]

illusionary height advantage and other subtle dominance body language

This sounds like it would work great if you were dealing with uh, how shall we say, weak minded people. Hows the effectivness of it against the big gorilla types? Bigger than you. Any stories of how it worked against someone other than a teen ager?

(I guess big people could be weak minded too...)

[Bogie]

What you'll see a lot of times is the guy psyching himself up to attack - They'll convince themselves that you're dissin' them, that your property (including girlfriend...) should rightfully be theirs, etc., and that you've done them harm... Then they attack.

[LawDog]

"Weak-minded types"?

Well, it doesn't work real well on the distaff side of the species, probably because they're used to men being taller than them.

Other than that, illusory height advantage with a courteous, but no-nonsense tone of voice has calmed the majority of agitated people I have to deal with.

Selected threat displays -- in my case, taking off my hat, placing it on a convenient surface and then heaving a deep, exasperated sigh whilst taking off my glasses and dropping them into the hat -- work wonders on making a critter decide that working himself up into an aggressive state might not be the best thing to do.

LawDog

[fastbolt]

... With tongue firmly planted in cheek ... because it's late ... I offer this bit of not-so-sage advice ...

Subtlety is a tool sometimes best not over used, lest it's edge become needlessly blunted ... especially when used on folks with bricks for brains ...

Except when it's done by LawDog ... ...

Nowadays, after an appropriate period has passed ... It's funny to think about the times one of our "clientele" would utter one of the few intelligent statements in their life, following a little interaction ... usually to the effect, "I guess that was pretty stupid of me, huh?" Yep, cause & effect can still be appreciated, even by the dull witted, sometimes ...

Your post was great! Thanks for the memory lane visit ...

[pbarrick]

Tony Blauer's first range of combat is Psychological. You're in a fight way before the first blow is thrown.

With the majority of body language being non-verbal, it makes sense to pay attention to those cues so you can pick up on the movements that are a precursor to violence at the earliest possible moment. (Hopefully soon enough to avoid the situation.)

The eyes don't tell you anything about anyone's state of mind. Their body language does that.

Posturing (i.e., putting up your hands, throwing your chest out, scowling, etc.) doesn't resolve the situation and may complicate it. At the very least, it puts you in a less advantageous position than assuming an assertive, rather than aggressive (read: postural), stance.

http://www.tonyblauer.com/pdf/basic_self-defense.pdf

[gryphon]

This is just the way that I have been taught, and it has served me very well for all bust twenty of my twenty eight years in this planet.

There are 2 levels of confrontation, the pre-physical and the physical.

In the pre-physical, this is where all that mental stuff and body language comes into play. Looking the BG in the eye for dominance can be good, but if that doesn't work, then you will need to reade his body language and mannerisms to see if he intends to escalate the situation. At this stage, staring into the eyes does little good if they do not give you the mental dominance you were seeking. More attention should be given toward the body of the BG and the surrounding area.

In the physical stage, you are now in a physical conflict with a BG or multiple BGs. Here it is more likely that you will be mesmerized by his body movements than by his eyes. A similar theory is applied to football. When trying to tackle an elusive runner, you have 2 places to look, either the waist or the eyes. In a self defense situation, we drop looking at the waist and look into the eyes. I learned the hard way at not looking at the eyes when fighting. When looking at the eyes, you can almost telegraph the moves of your opponent. Albeit, I have had some practice in this, it did not take long to master. The practice will help you better understand what is going on with the opponent, and it leaves you less vulnerable to feints and counters. It also helps in widening the tunnel vision allowing for better peripheral vision as well.

I understand that everyone does not have the luxury of being trained in this and that a lot of martial arts schools probably do not teach this, or if they do, they are not instructing in it's proper usage, just that it should be done.
Like I said, I beleive this to be true as it has served me well for almost 20 years. And it was taught to me by a family member who had lived in NYC for a few years as a bouncer and cooler. He came home after many a fight without a scratch on him and many tales to tell. Not only that, but a lot more experience than any of use would want to have.

[Edward429451]

"Weak-minded types"?

Yeah. I mean those who can't or won't see through the illusion. Size don't really matter, little guys are / can be just as dangerous as big guys (Another Heinlein quote I've never seen on a sig line...'Never frighten a little man...He'll kill you'...)

Now selected threat displays are another matter altogether. Coming from an LEO theres nothing illusory about them.

I would see that big tall hat climbing up on that pedestal and take the hint and try to deescalate the situation. Not for the illusion, but for the 1-2-3 of LEO procedure. If a BG tried that crap though I'd be lookin for another option maybe. Depends on the situation. I've backed down some pretty big guys before. (Sweatin it, but successful!)

[justmeandmydr200]

Hands, feet, and teeth kill. They are what you should be monitoring-not the eyes. A sociopath is a totally amoral(views all situations without values)person who can easily disquise his or her emotions.
The eyes are just a smoke screen to defeat you.

[wingnutx]

Don't glue your eyes to his hands, either.

A boxing instructor I was sparring with noticed that I was following his hands with my eyes, and decided just shoot his left straight out to the side. I automatically turned my head just enough to let him give my a right cross right in the side of the head. End of lesson.

[pbarrick]

You shouldn't be staring at all, really. You're watching the hands in the sense of keeping track of them with your peripheral vision. A defuse stare that allows you to utilize your peripheral vision, focused at about his chest level, will allow you to keep track of what you need to see.

His hands are more of a danger because they are what humans use to hold weapons. Any movement of the hands is also going to be associated with shoulder movement and elbow movement.

You won't be able to "read anyone's intentions". At best, you can make an educated guess. Physical motions that correlate to your movement and aggressive motions that signal an attack are what you should be looking for in the aggressor's pattern of motion.

[Cowdogpete]

no one else has said it so I will...

In God we trust. Everyone else keep your (insert expletive here) hands where I can see them.

[Spectre]

Actually, Paul, there have been times while training, that I knew the attack that was coming before any movement from my training partner (all coming from the same stance, with no setup). I still flubbed, though- because, even with knowledge of what's coming, you still have to move at the right time!