Do you grapple?

[OldMarksman]

Posted by adamBomb:

You are more likely to use grappling then EVER using your firearm unless you are LEO or in the military. Why? You have a much greater chance that uncle joe will get drunk and out of control at the summer BBQ. Being able to restrain someone without knocking them out is a very good skill to have. Its not that bad things dont happen but the chances of these kinds of things are usually greater than SHTF scenarios.

Unless you are LEO, it is most unlikely that you will ever by presented with a lawful reason to restrain anyone.

The are exceptions--a family member having a seizure, for example--but they are not at all common.

Once one has elected to engage in some kind of a fight to restrain someone, ones's chance of prevailing in a self defense claim, should things turn sour, will be very much impaired.

The chances of having to employ deadly force for self defense on any one day are extremely remote. The chances of having to do so at least once in a lifetime are much higher. The consequences of not being able to do so should the need arise can be extremely severe.

[Deaf Smith]

Strange, I have one burglar and one purse snatched to my credit. The burglar was stealing from my parent's house while I was in college. I used a Colt Cobra to hold him at bay. The purse snatcher was in the Virgen Islands when my wife and I were on our honeymoon. Two of us ran the guy down. The other guy bear hugged 'em while I applied a wrist lock. The purse snatcher kept screaming, "let go of my hand" (well I WAS a bit enthusiastic...) We didn't "go to the ground".

There was no "grappling". Even in the fights I was in while in high school there was no grappling. Does that mean it does not happen? No.

But go look at "YouTube" and search for "street fights", and you will see this 85 percent thing is hokie.

Deaf

[stonewall50]

Originally Posted by Deaf Smith

.



In such as Krav Maga, which I spent some time doing, they teach you the basics of grappling and then they tell you to avoid the ground if you can, but if you can't, do everything, and use anything, to break contact once on the ground. They teach that once on the ground you are vulnerable to attacks by others as well as anyone who is stronger. So, such as spralling or rolling through the fall is what you use. For you see the object is to survive, not to get a submission hold. Submission holds only work on one attacker. ONE.



This ain't about neglect, this is about how much emphasis should be placed on it in training.



Deaf

I agree. And the amount of emphasis should be...avoiding grappling. And that is grapple training. It should also be in getting off your back. I spent all last night in class on escapes. About 2 hours. Escaping side, escaping mount, and escaping Kesagatame (scarf hold). That is something every fighter should learn.

And I am holding my position that you don't need to learn any submissions (except MAYBE the Kimora that is utilized if someone grabs at a holstered gun while you are on your back...but even then...better to know how to keep them from doing that by learning to escape your back).

[stonewall50]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

I think the vast majority of individuals on this forum likely realize that. I think it is a matter of perspective. When faced with an aggressive attacker I see three options: (1) retreat - this is by far my most preferred option (2) concede to the demands of my attacker if they do not threaten my safety or that of those I have a moral obligation to defend (3) deploy as overwhelming force as I can possibly deploy to end the aggressive actions as quickly as possible.



I have a great preference for option 1. Because I believe that the use of overwhelming force is always a negative action (please note there is a difference IMO between a negative action and one that is wrong or unjustified) I also greatly prefer option 2 over option 3.



That being said I think we all need to be aware of contact fighting that does not involve a firearm. If someone draws a knife on me at 30 feet outside of my house deploying my firearm and using overwhelming force would likely have drastic legal consequences. However history teaches me that if they are much closer I have to have an option other than my firearm for creating distance.



Being forced to grapple is, to me, a nightmare scenario. Distance is my friend and any contact fighting I use is going to be in an attempt to gain distance or movement in order to retreat or use a firearm. Further because I am not of means to make kidnapping for ransom a likely motive for my attacker I cannot envision any scenario where my attacker is able to close on me and put me in any type of hold where he or she would not have simply deployed overwhelming force. No one is going to walk up behind me and suddenly put me in some hold. Anyone willing to cross that line and able to approach me that close without raising my suspicion is likely to stab / shoot / club me.



Maybe I am wrong but focusing on grappling for self defense is to me of somewhat questionable value. Even focusing on anything but the most rudimentary of contact fighting is, again for defensive use, of somewhat suspect value. Now if you enjoy training in those things for other reasons great - do it. If you are a peace office or work in the security industry you have different goals than I do in regards to confrontations and need more skills and I understand that. For the armed citizen concentrating on grappling is likely not where I would spend my limited training time, money, and effort.

I am not suggesting anyone take it up as their only defensive art. I am suggesting they do not neglect it. Any fight can end up on the ground against your wishes. All it takes is bad luck.

[stonewall50]

Originally Posted by Deaf Smith

Strange, I have one burglar and one purse snatched to my credit. The burglar was stealing from my parent's house while I was in college. I used a Colt Cobra to hold him at bay. The purse snatcher was in the Virgen Islands when my wife and I were on our honeymoon. Two of us ran the guy down. The other guy bear hugged 'em while I applied a wrist lock. The purse snatcher kept screaming, "let go of my hand" (well I WAS a bit enthusiastic...) We didn't "go to the ground".



There was no "grappling". Even in the fights I was in while in high school there was no grappling. Does that mean it does not happen? No.



But go look at "YouTube" and search for "street fights", and you will see this 85 percent thing is hokie.



Deaf

85%? Nah. 85% of fights going to the ground is not even remotely close. But you did just give a 50% stat lol. But that is because I consider bear hugs and wrist locks grappling.

My definition of grapple training is ANYTHING from defending against submissions, takedowns, sweeps, and basically anything that is the art of not allowing someone to put any kind of control hold or throw on you.

[doofus47]

I do a bit; like multiplication tables, it's a good thing to have seen and done before a pop quiz.

[Tucker 1371]

I wrestled for 4 years in high school, very casually dabbled in some BJJ, and then tried MMA for a little while, also very casually. I've also been certified 3 times in PPCT (LEO martial arts) and am a tan belt in MCMAP (Marine Corps).

The most useful of all that I have trained in is, BY FAR, PPCT. There is absolutely nothing fancy about it. It is all gross motor skills and every technique is based around the assumption that you are wearing a gun that you don't want your adversary to take away. Some techniques involve gaining space and employing your sidearm. If you are carrying, depending on the totality of the circumstances, that is the most advisable thing to do should you find yourself in a hand to hand altercation. Gain space, disengage the threat, side step or circle to an angle that gives you the advantage, draw and give loud verbal commands.

If, for whatever reason, you find yourself on the ground with an attacker in a position of advantage, maintain control of your weapon at all costs. If he gets it you are at his mercy. If I have the opportunity to draw my weapon, with someone on top of me, I will and I will use it. That is absolutely a deadly force situation IMO.

**DISCLAIMER**
I am NOT an attorney. The above post is NOT legal advice and should not be considered or used as such.

[Deaf Smith]

Stonewall,

The ONLY reason we didn't punch and kick the purse snatcher was cause HE didn't punch or kick. He tried to just get away. If he had thrown a punch I'd have gone to elbows mixed with left and right crosses.

You see at the time this happened I was a 4th dan. Taekwondo and taught my own school. I'd been in Okinawan karate, Judo, and some Shotokan as well as lots of TangSoDoo. Later I got into Krav Maga to boot.

Nowdays I'm a 5th Dan and I play with Wing Chun, escrima, and Kali for fun but I've also competed in NRA leg matches, IPSC (class 'A'), IDPA (expert and above in all classifications), and IHMSA. I have a very nice set of trophies in my man cave. Plus been to quite a few schools ran by well know trainers.

Deaf

[Skans]

I am not suggesting anyone take it up as their only defensive art. I am suggesting they do not neglect it. Any fight can end up on the ground against your wishes. All it takes is bad luck.

There are scenarios where you won't be able to immediately deploy your firearm. I've practiced a number of them. From this I learned that most people (including myself) are simply not quick enough or good enough to "whip" out their firearm and start shooting the BG when you are being held upclose at gunpoint. You need a certain amount of distance between you and your attacker, otherwise reaching for your firearm will get you shot. The defensive drills I've practiced involve using having a variety of physical skills. For instance, if someone holding a firearm on me and happens to get within 3 feet of me, I may need to physically strike the gunman (or gunman's arm) before I can get enough distance between us for me to deploy my firearm. I consider this a form of grappling, but call it what you want.

A firearm is just a tool for self defense. IMHO, you are at a serious disadvantage if it's your only tool.

[FireForged]

I have taken a couple of weapon retention classes as well as ground fighting and ARCON. My original introduction into any sort of self defense was the nearly forgotten Yun Mu Kwan back in the late 70's. I don't know that I have a plan but I will react intuitively if attacked. What I will do or to what degree depends a great deal on what is happening. I do not really consider myself skilled in fighting but I am a pretty fair brawler haha. I think that about 80% of fighting is personal grit and 20% is what you know.

[NateKirk]

Unless you are LEO, it is most unlikely that you will ever by presented with a lawful reason to restrain anyone.

The are exceptions--a family member having a seizure, for example--but they are not at all common.

Not related to topic but thought I'd comment, don't restrain someone who's having a seizure. Move away anything they can hurt themselves on and put them on the ground where they can't fall if possible.

Back to the subject at hand, I agree with Adam that grappling skills would get more use than firearm skills. There are many instances where non lethal methods are more appropriate. These skills are made even more important by the fact that many states don't allow the carry of non lethal weapons such as batons and blackjacks, with some regulating even pepper spray I believe.

[Nanuk]

Not related to topic but thought I'd comment, don't restrain someone who's having a seizure. Move away anything they can hurt themselves on and put them on the ground where they can't fall if possible.

Bingo.