The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 4, 2007, 06:20 PM   #26
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
What gets me is the attitude that you can practice on your own and "perfect" this skill over time. With all due respect nobody but nobody would suggest that you could become an olympic level boxer by yourself in a basement gym, but some are virtually suggesting that as it applies to self defense.

I have also coached soccer for 25+ years. The level of skill needed to disarm someone is higher than that needed to be a decent HS level soccer player. I defy anyone to take a weekend class, practice in the back yard for a few months, and then see if they could play rec league soccer at a HS level.

The hours of training it takes to be even remotely proficient in any martial art is incredible. You can go to the range for two hours a week and be fairly proficient in use of handguns, it takes more like two hours a day for at least 2 or 3 years to become proficient at a martial art.

I apologise in advance if my post offends by it's tone. The fact is I get annoyed when the hours and hours I have spent training gets belittled by those who think it is easy or simple. Besides, if it was easy my scars wouldn't mean so much and I couldn't impress they ladies.
Justme is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 06:55 PM   #27
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,947
There's a disconnect in the discussion. I think the problem is that no one's saying that attackers come in all varieties.

Yes, one can learn effective techniques for disarming an attacker in a single session. Yes, with practice, one can use these techniques effectively against some attackers.

But it's just like any other kind of self-defense. If you come up against a strong, skilled, determined attacker your chances of using techniques learned in a one day class to neutralize him are slim to none.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 08:52 PM   #28
Lurper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
Quote:
You can go to the range for two hours a week and be fairly proficient in use of handguns, it takes more like two hours a day for at least 2 or 3 years to become proficient at a martial art.
Is it just me or does anyone else see the contradiction in this statement? Handguns are no different. I can assure you that you will not reach my level of skill by two hours a week, even for 10 years. Handguns are no different than anything else. Why would anyone think that you could learn handgun skills from one class and be reasonbly proficient yet say that it takes years to learn to be proficient in physical skills?
Lurper is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:08 PM   #29
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,790
And meanwhile, no one has taken a stab at answering the question I asked in post #19 of this thread:

Now, given that reality and none other (not the fantasy world we all wish were true!), what would you suggest this 18 year old going off to college do about personal defense?

1) Learn nothing at all.

2) Take a basic, reality-based class in defense skills, increase her personal awareness, practice those skills, and learn more when she is able to do so.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:10 PM   #30
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
Why would anyone think that you could learn handgun skills from one class and be reasonbly proficient yet say that it takes years to learn to be proficient in physical skills?
Because it's true. That's the beauty of guns, they are simple to learn and simple to use. It does not take a great deal of practice and training to be competent with a gun. The guy beside me shot expert in basic training even though he had never held a gun before in his life.

If a victim of domestic violence asks me how to protect herself I would not hesitate to suggest any one of a dozen good handguns, which she could learn to use in the course of a weekend. After 2 or 3 years of training 10-12 hours a week that same woman, were she in good physical shape, might be able to defend herself against a violent man.

It's a little like cars. It doesn't take that much practice before you can go pick up some groceries, but that doesn't mean you're going out on the F-1 circuit either.

Pax, of course she should take a REALITY based self defense courrse. I am just suggesting that a course that teaches disarming the first day out is not reality based.
Justme is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:11 PM   #31
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,790
Justme ~

I'm sorry that it offends you to be told this, but it is possible to learn basic disarms in a single weekend -- given the proper mindset and a commitment to practice.

This is a far cry from "becoming proficient in a martial art." You can keep your it-takes-years belief on that one, for I agree with you.

But learning how to leverage a gun out of an attacker's hand and shoot him with it (or with your own more reliable weapon)? It's not rocket science. Anyone can do that -- given the willingness to learn.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:33 PM   #32
Lurper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
Quote:
Because it's true. That's the beauty of guns, they are simple to learn and simple to use. It does not take a great deal of practice and training to be competent with a gun. The guy beside me shot expert in basic training even though he had never held a gun before in his life.
I guess if that is your yardstick, then perhaps it is true. But you will not achieve any REAL proficiency any easier than you will with martial arts. Contrary to what you may want to think, it does take a great deal of practice and training to be competent with a gun. Anyone who thinks otherwise has never met anyone who is truly competent. If it was easy, everyone would shoot like Leatham, Jarrett, Miculek or me. I find it amusing how people think that they can become proficient with a firearm by firing 1000 rounds!

In answer to Pax's question:
Obviously some training is better than none. But you still must acknowledge the fact that without practice, the technique means nothing. I think some people believe that these techniques are like knowledge, once you learn it, you don't forget. You can file the technique away until you need it. That isn't true. You have to practice and refine the technique for it to be useful.
Lurper is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:38 PM   #33
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Lurper, a person does not have to be an IPSA champion in order to effectively use a firearm, which is pretty lucky for the vast majority of us. That was my point about the cars, you don't have to be a F-1 champion in order to pick the kids up from school or go get some groceries.

By your definition not one in ten cops are proficient with firearms, yet they seem to get along just fine with a few exceptions from time to time.
Justme is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:52 PM   #34
evan1293
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2007
Location: CT
Posts: 784
Quote:
By your definition not one in ten cops are proficient with firearms, yet they seem to get along just fine with a few exceptions from time to time
Actually having spent a good amount of time training with cops its become apparent to me that the average shooting skill level of cops is appaulling. The statistics indicate this with the hit rate of officers being well below 30%. That is why there is such a push to create new techniques and tactics to get cops to actually hit their target. A better suggestion would be to get these cops to routinely practice time proven firearm technique in dynamic range type settings. Fortunately for our LEO, they very rarely if ever have to deploy their weapons in a life or death situation on the job.
evan1293 is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 09:56 PM   #35
cgraham
Member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 47
That's why guns have been known as "The Equalizer".

There is no equality in a bare-hands on gun situation, so I think the gun discussion is irrelevant to the OT.

(I was responding to Justme's comment)

C
__________________
Seeking Knowledge, Hoping for Wisdom
cgraham is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 10:00 PM   #36
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,947
Quote:
...a person does not have to be an IPSA champion in order to effectively use a firearm, which is pretty lucky for the vast majority of us.
Likewise, one does not have to devote a lifetime to martial arts in order to learn and use a couple of disarm techniques.
Quote:
...it does take a great deal of practice and training to be competent with a gun.
And yet, in the U.S., guns are successfully used in self defense between 1 and 2 million times a year according to a recent study.

This gets back to what I said in my earlier post, there are levels of attackers.

A one day class in disarm techniques won't let you defeat a martial arts expert or a strong, fast, skilled, determined attacker.

A one day class in handgun techniques will not let you defeat a national champion.

BUT, either one will give you tools that you can effectively use against the less "elite".

If your goal is to be the best, a one day class and some practice will not cut it. If your goal is to be better than average--or even a LOT better than average, then that's a different story.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 10:47 PM   #37
The Canuck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2006
Location: Calgary Alberta, Canada
Posts: 307
Psychology of the defender and the attacker are as important as the training.

You take a girl off the high school soccer pitch and make her determined to win her confrontation and put her up against a rapist who will swing either way and I'll put my money on the girl.

A person who is determined to not go down will put up so much of a stink that it will take a very disciplined attacker to put them down.
__________________
"If you put one in the snot locker, it doesn't matter what calibre it is".
The Canuck is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 10:48 PM   #38
Lurper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Posts: 943
Quote:
And yet, in the U.S., guns are successfully used in self defense between 1 and 2 million times a year according to a recent study.
In fairness, in the vast majority of those cases shots are not fired.

However John, you are correct in the final assesment you need only be better than your attacker.
Lurper is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 11:30 PM   #39
kungfucowboy
Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2005
Posts: 61
could a smaller female disarm a larger male attacker yes i have personally met 3 who could (all had studied aikido, aikijutsu ect. for 10+ years)

after only a 2 day class no! practice makes perfect in martial arts.
kungfucowboy is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 11:47 PM   #40
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,947
Quote:
In fairness, in the vast majority of those cases shots are not fired.
I wasn't going to mention that--but yes, in many cases you don't need any skill at all with a firearm to deter an attack. In most cases it's not even necessary to know how to "make it go bang".
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 11:50 PM   #41
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,083
Yes, you can teach a 1 or 2 day class to your average person and give them techniques for self-defense and/or disarming an attacker. Out of a class of 20, however, I'd guess that probably 2-4 will dedicate themselves to practicing consistently over the next three months or longer. 6-8 will practice unevenly over the next two months and the rest will show a friend or family member what they learned, maybe fool around with it a little and then slide back into routine life.

There must be a caveat with these types of classes however. That some people will be bigger, stronger and better than you are. When this happens, you need at least one or two things you can do as "backup" plans.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old September 4, 2007, 11:55 PM   #42
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,790
Quote:
I wasn't going to mention that--but yes, in many cases you don't need any skill at all with a firearm to deter an attack. In most cases it's not even necessary to know how to "make it go bang".
Oddly enough, that's true with unarmed combatives too. Many serial rapists will desist if the intended victim resists in any way.

BillCA's post makes good sense. People with the right attitude toward training are rare. That's not a failure of the training, but of the student.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 12:43 PM   #43
9mmHP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 2007
Location: Indiana/Indpls Metro Area
Posts: 318
Re: Pax

In answer to your question, I would suggest that you not give ANYONE this foolish false sense of security by suggesting that they can now defend against a determined attacker because they took a one-day feel good class. It's irresponsible and it's dangerous, and can lead to taking greater risks.
9mmHP is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 12:45 PM   #44
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
Oddly enough, that's true with unarmed combatives too
No it's not. In desperation people can sometimes fend off an attacker, but it is a combination of luck and adrenaline.
Justme is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:02 PM   #45
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,790
9mm ~

So you're taking Option 1, continue in ignorance?

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:13 PM   #46
buzz_knox
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Location: Knoxville, in the Free State of Tennesse
Posts: 4,191
Quote:
I'm sorry that it offends you to be told this, but it is possible to learn basic disarms in a single weekend -- given the proper mindset and a commitment to practice.
The disarm/retention portions of LFI-2 are significantly less than a weekend in length, and will allow the average person to defeat most threats if followed through with rigorous practice.

Steve Tarani's classes also are a few days in length and the techniques are ones that can be easily picked up and used if (there are those magic words again) followed through with rigorous practice.

The basic and critical information can be conveyed in a weekend. Taking that information and making it instinctive and competent requires repetitive, quality practice.

Strangely, that's what Tarani, Ayoob, Awerbuck, Rogers, and most every other instructor teach: the basic skills are easy, making them instinctive requires dedication.

Wait . . . isn't that what Pax has been saying all along?

Wait
buzz_knox is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:20 PM   #47
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,104
Pax - you are fighting against a tendency of gun boards. Every question must have a 0,1 answer. It has to be absolutist and macho.

It's like the OC debate. Since there are some folks who can fight after being sprayed - NO ONE SHOULD CARRY OC AS IT MAKES THEM OVERCONFIDENT

Since some folks aren't stopped by a 22 LR or a 32 ACP NO ONE SHOULD CARRY A MOUSE GUN AS IT MAKES THEM OVERCONFIDENT

Thus a young woman or an old man for that case is better off not being able to disengage or stop a reasonable amount of attackers as some on the list think they are super physical specimens.

Nor do I think that most folks who take such courses think they are completely confident against all attackers. They have learned something.

It's funny - how many posts start with some guy, saying "I'm 6'6" and 250 and most folks don't mess with me". Are they a touch overconfident as compared to a little guy with a knife?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:25 PM   #48
Justme
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,066
Is it better to be totally ignorant or to have your basic ignorance increased? Believing you can disarm anyone after a few hours of class, no matter how many hours of private practice, means you have increased instead of decreased your ignorance.

Anyone who thinks they can disarm an angry sociopath is deluded and has obviously never spent much time dealing with violent people. I have trained for decades and am under no delusions that I could disarm anyone. I drive daily but I don't think I could take a weekend class and then race on the F-1 circuit, but in my mind that is what is being suggested as possible.

Anyway, so a 125lb woman disarms an angry sociopathy, what now? Think he really needed the gun in the first place? If you answered yes, go sit in the corner.

If it was possible to reliably disarm someone a gun would be worthless in self defense.

Why does everyone think that sociopaths are easy to disarm but law abiding gun owners are not? That makes no sense.

BTW I am 5'8" and carry a keltec .32, which I don't think anyone could take from me without getting shot. Oddly enough nobody ever messes with me either. I could be because I have 10-15 first cousins who are mean bastards.
Justme is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:31 PM   #49
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,790
Justme ~

The Boston Strangler was really easy to defeat. ANY level of resistance against him, from making a noise to fighting back in any way, would cause him to run off. He got his jollies out of killing non resistant women.

Ted Bundy never kidnapped anyone who did not get willingly into his car with him (except those who were bludgeoned into unconsciousness while sleeping, and had no chance either to comply or resist).

Any resistance at all will generally cause the most dangerous types of serial rapists/murderers -- the experienced guys who have done it again and again and again, escalating from rape to murder, and with plans to keep going without getting caught -- to leave the woman alone. Provided, that is, that the resistance begins early enough: only one woman survived without crippling injury after getting into Bundy's car. Any resistance at all while in public was enough to chase him off. Waiting until they were inside the car, she was dead.

Non-educated resistance (flailing or striking the torso; yelling, etc) might stop those guys, but it will generally make the non-"professional" rapists angrier and more apt to do serious damage up to and including murder. But against the guys who intended murder in the first place, even non-educated resistance is often surprisingly effective.

Capable, educated resistance will generally deflect the majority of date rapes and other "social situation" sexual assaults, provided the woman has educated herself enough to understand the social dynamics of what is going on and does not stop to argue or discuss once she has begun to make her escape. Simply knowing the escapes from common grabs, coupled with a basic understanding of date-rape psychology, may enable her to make good an escape that she would not have been able to make without that knowledge.

There are a lot of studies that show an unarmed woman who physically resists a rape or sexual assault is more likely to be injured than those who do not resist. However, a closer look at the data generally show that a majority of women who were injured and also fought back generally were injured first, then began fighting back, rather than the other way around. In other words, it was the injury that provoked her to fight, rather than her fighting that provoked the injury.

I hope it is clear that I am not arguing for ignorance here. Obviously more training is better. Obviously a solid mindset is better than a flabby one and an assertive attitude is better than an aggressive one or a passive one.

What I am arguing against, very strenuously, is the ridiculous notion that women can't learn some basic physical actions that will increase their safety in any time frame short of "years." I strongly detest the fallacy that unless you are (physically and emotionally) prepared to take on the worst of the worst in an extended altercation, unless you dedicate years of your life to learning this stuff and spend half your waking hours thinking about it, well you might as well forget it and learn nothing at all. That's the foolishness I'm arguing against.

If you heard me arguing against getting more training than a weekend, or if you heard me saying that a single day of training without a good mindset and without continued practice, would be enough to take on every guy who ever landed on Death Row -- well, if you heard that, you heard wrong. That's not what I said.

I'm not arguing for false or misplaced confidence. I AM arguing that head-in-the-sand ignorance is a bad thing, training a good thing -- and training plus the commitment to practice and learn more is best of all.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 5, 2007, 01:35 PM   #50
Tanzer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2007
Posts: 884
I was into Martial arts for years. My ex-wife (tough character) was only a yellow belt when she took a two day course in the use of a kubaton (spelling?). I was mortified at how proficient she was, especially after being her practice dummy for a few weeks. She took it seriously - that's the key.
__________________
Only the ignorant find ignorance to be bliss. Only those of us who know better will suffer from it.
Tanzer is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14912 seconds with 7 queries